Ji> 


tibxaxy  of  Che  theological  gmimvy 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 
PRESENTED  BY 

The  Estate  of 
Frederick  N.  Will son 


6S500 
S 


c88 


The  Higher  Criticism 
Cross-Examined 

Hn  appeal  ant>  a  TKHarnina 


BY 


Frederick  Davis  Storey 


PROVE  ALL   THLNGS—St.  Paul 


PHILADELPHIA 

Gbe  <3tiffitb  £  "RowlanD  press 

M       C        M       V 


Copyright  1905  by  the 
American  Baptist  Publication  Society 

Published  August,  1905 


ffrom  tbe  Society '0  own  jpvegg 


MY  WIFE 


WHO    HAS    EVER    BEEN    TO    ME 

A   WISE    COUNSELOR 

AN    INCARNATE    CONSCIENCE 

AND    AN    UNFAILING    INSPIRATION 


PREFACE 


This  book  is  precisely  what  it  purports  to  be — 
an  appeal  to  ordinary  Christians  by  one  of  them 
from  their  own  standpoint,  namely,  that  of  be- 
lievers in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God 
and  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  in  the  Hebrew 
and  Christian  Scriptures  as  the  only  authoritative 
record  of  the  revelation  of  God  to  men.  The 
writer  expressly  disavows  any  pretensions  to  schol- 
arship, or  to  the  possession  of  any  knowledge  as 
an  expert  in  any  department  of  biblical  criticism. 
He  does  not  claim  to  meet  the  critics  on  their  own 
ground  ;  nor  does  he  hope  to  present  any  consid- 
erations which  they  will  deem  worthy  of  notice. 
His  aim  is  a  much  more  modest  one — simply  to 
call  the  attention  of  Christians  of  thoughtful  mind 
to  the  results  which,  in  his  judgment,  must  neces- 
sarily follow  the  acceptance  of  critical  theories  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  only  account  of  the  facts  upon 
which  our  faith  is  based,  and  to  the  kind  of  reasons 
adduced  by  the  critics  in  support  of  a  position 
which  seems  to  him  absolutely  to  preclude  the 
possibility  of  any  revelation  at  all. 

For  a  long  time  past  he  had  been  perplexed  and 

7 


PREFACE 

oppressed  by  the  open  skepticism  and  the  confi- 
dent tone  of  the  "  Christian  critics  "  in  their  treat- 
ment of  the  foundations  of  the  Christian  faith.  A 
year  or  two  since,  a  serious  accident  confined  him 
to  his  home  for  many  months.  This  period  of 
enforced  inaction  he  occupied  in  a  careful  and 
painstaking  examination  of  the  critical  case,  so  far 
as  the  same  had  been  done  into  English.  The 
following  pages  set  forth  the  impressions  thereby 
made  upon  his  mind ;  and  as  such  he  offers  them 
for  the  consideration  of  those  believers  who  are 
still  willing  to  follow  the  light  of  revelation,  rather 
than  the  ignis  fatnus  of  speculative  criticism. 

The  writer's  thanks  are  due  to  several  friends  : 
To  the  Rev.  G.  H.  Charles,  of  Philadelphia,  Pa., 
the  Rev.  D.  D.  Munro,  of  East  Orange,  N.  J.,  and 
the  Rev.  C.  W.  Skemp,  of  Eccles,  Manchester,  for 
many  years  secretary  of  Rawdon  College,  England, 
who  have  kindly  read  and  commented  on  his  man- 
uscript ;  and  to  Mr.  B.  H.  Doane,  of  the  New 
York  bar,  for  much  valuable  assistance  in  the  way 
of  suggestion  during  the  progress  of  the  work. 

He  would  especially  express  his  obligations  to 
his  friend,  the  Rev.  M.  H.  Pogson,  d.  d.,  of  New 
York,  a  stalwart  defender  of  the  old  faith,  but  for 
whose  warm  encouragement  and  dogged  insistence 
this  book,  such  as  it  is,  would  never  have  been 
completed.  F  d.  s. 

The  Bronx,  N.  Y.,  June,  1905. 

8 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS 

Chapter  Page 

I.   Criticism  and  the  Church n 

II.  Criticism  in  the  Open 23 

III.  The  Old  Belief 37 

IV.  The  Old  Book 47 

V.  The  New  History 63 

VI.  The  Mutilated  Book 77 

VII.  The  Nature  of  the  Evidence 91 

VIII.   Internal  Evidence 105 

IX.  The  Historical  Evidences 119 

X.  The  Unequal  Balances 135 

9 


TABLE   OF    CONTENTS 


Chapter  Page 

XI.  The  Argument  from  Silence 153 

XII.  The  Argument  from  Non-observance  ...  165 

XIII.  The  External  Evidences  :  Babylonian    .    .177 

XIV.  The  External  Evidences  :  Egyptian     .    .    .193 
XV.  The  Question  of  Morals 207 

XVI.  The  Practical  Outcome 223 

XVII.  Christ  versus  Criticism 241 


10 


CRITICISM    AND   THE    CHURCH 


Inspirer  of  the  ancient  seers 

Who  wrote  from  thee  the  sacred  page, 
The  same  through  all  succeeding  years, 

To  us  in  our  degenerate  age 
The  spirit  of  thy  word  impart, 
And  breathe  the  life  into  our  heart. 

While  now  thine  oracles  we  read 

With  earnest  prayer  and  strong  desire, 

O  let  thy  Spirit  from  thee  proceed, 
Our  souls  to  awaken  and  inspire; 

Our  weakness  help,  our  darkness  chase, 

And  guide  us  by  the  light  of  grace. 

Whene'  er  in  error' s  paths  we  rove, 
The  living  God  through  sin  forsake, 

Our  conscience  by  thy  word  reprove. 

Convince  and  bring  the  wanderers  back, 

Deep  wounded  by  thy  Spirit' s  sword, 

And  then  by  Gilead'  s  balm  restored. 

The  sacred  lessons  of  thy  grace, 

Transmitted  through  thy  word,  repeat, 

And  train  us  up  in  all  thy  ways, 
To  make  us  in  thy  will  complete, 

To  teach,  convince,  correct,  reprove, 

And  build  us  up  in  holiest  love. 

—  Charles  Wesley. 


CRITICISM    AND    THE    CHURCH 

Seemeth  it  a  small  matter  unto  you  to  have  eaten  up  the 
good  pasture,  but  you  must  tread  down  with  your  feet  the 
residue  of  your  pastures  ?  and  to  have  drunk  of  the  deep 
waters,  but  you  must  foul  the  residue  with  your  feet  ? 

—Ezekiel  9*"*, 

The  success  which  has  in  recent  years  attended 
the  introduction  and  propagation  of  that  system 
of  biblical  exposition  known  as  the  "  higher  criti- 
cism," is  to  many  Christians  one  of  the  saddest 
and  most  portentous  signs  of  the  times.  Its  aims 
are  so  frankly  destructive  of  every  element  of  the 
supernatural  in  religion,  its  methods  and  many  of 
its  exponents  are  so  lacking  in  common  respect 
for  a  book  which  has  for  long  ages  past  been  held 
in  the  highest  reverence  by  Jew  and  Christian  alike, 
and  its  logical  consequences  are  so  wide-reaching 
and  attack  at  so  many  vital  points  the  authority 
of  the  Bible  and  the  foundations  of  the  Christian 
system,  nay,  the  very  possibility  of  revelation  itself, 
that  one  is  simply  amazed  at  the  indifferent  atti- 
tude, if  indeed  one  may  not  call  it  acquiescent,  of 
the  church  of  Christ  toward  its  theories  and  its 
other  extravagancies. 

13 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

Assaults  upon  the  Bible  are  not  new.  When- 
ever an  authentic  word  of  God  has  been  promul- 
gated, the  sons  of  Jehudi  with  their  mutilating 
penknives  have  not  been  far  distant.  Denials  of 
supernatural  intervention  in  human  affairs,  of  a 
divinely  guided  and  controlled  history,  and  of  the 
self-revelation  of  God  to  men  are  not  confined  to 
the  present  age.  Instances  may  be  found  in  the 
first  century,  as  in  the  twentieth  ;  and  when  they 
proceed  from  the  lips  of  avowed  skeptics,  men  who 
sit  in  the  seat  of  the  scornful,  they  occasion  no 
surprise.  It  is  just  what  might  be  expected.  But 
it  is  matter  of  wonder  to  find  essentially  anti- 
Christian  attacks  upon  the  trustworthiness,  and 
even  upon  the  common  honesty,  of  the  word  of 
God,  aided  and  abetted  by  priests  of  a  great  his- 
toric church,  who  by  their  ordination  vows  are 
committed  to  an  unfeigned  belief  in  all  the  canon- 
ical Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
and,  by  subscription  to  its  articles,  are  pledged  to 
their  defense  as  the  written  word  of  God.  And 
the  same  wonder  may  be  expressed  in  regard  to 
an  important  section  of  the  ministry  in  the  other 
great  evangelical  denominations. 

In  view  of  this  aspect  of  the  case,  the  general 
body  of  believers  might  be  warranted  in  the  charge 
that  the  Christian  faith  is  being  wounded  in  the 
house  of  its  friends.  For,  although  these  Chris- 
tian critics  may  claim,  after  all  their  dissections 

14 


CRITICISM    AND    THE    CHURCH 


and  demolitions,  to  preserve  unimpaired  their  rev- 
erence for  God's  word  and  their  loyalty  to  its 
authority,  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  they  can  do  it ; 
and  the  plain  man  with  his  contempt  for  hairsplit- 
ting, demands  "  straight  talk,"  and  is  apt  to  char- 
acterize by  a  harsh  name  ambiguities  and  mental 
reservations,  no  matter  how  dexterous  in  statement 
or  fair-seeming  in  intention  they  may  be.  A  plain 
"Yes,"  or  a  plain  "  No,"  he  understands;  but  a 
"  Yes-and-no  "  deliverance,  when  once  he  grasps  its 
bearings,  will  meet  with  scant  courtesy  and  short 
shrift  at  his  hands.  He  is  more  than  likely  to  wash 
his  hands  of  the  whole  matter  as  something  too 
dubious  for  him  to  concern  himself  about. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  astonishing  vogue 
of  the  higher  criticism,  and  the  supine  acceptance 
by  the  Protestant  Christian  world  of  its  subversive 
dogmas,  seem  to  point  to  a  precedent  condition  of 
decadent  spiritual  life  in  the  church.  When  an 
organism  is  in  a  state  of  robust  health,  and  its 
vital  processes  are  in  lively  and  vigorous  exercise, 
there  is  a  strong  probability  that  the  intrusion  of 
any  virus  into  the  system  will  be  rendered  innocu- 
ous by  the  operation  of  the  resistive  forces  uniting 
to  repel  the  invader  ;  while  the  same  organism  in 
a  low  and  impaired  condition,  and  with  the  pulses 
of  life  beating  feebly,  will  fall  an  easy  prey  to  the 
inroads  of  disease.  A  church  with  a  vivid  appre- 
hension of  spiritual   truth   and    an    experimental 

i5 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 


knowledge  of  divine  things,  verified  in  all  the 
vicissitudes  of  life  by  the  continuing  testimony  of 
the  abiding  Spirit,  possesses  an  antiseptic  against 
all  poisons.  It  has  an  infallible  touchstone  by 
which  to  discern  in  any  new  presentation  its  har- 
mony with  saving  truth,  or  the  reverse.  It  says  : 
"  To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony,  if  they  speak 
not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  they  have 
no  light  in  them  "  ;  and  it  would  on  the  instant 
meet  the  masked  approaches  of  infidelity,  under 
whatever  guise,  with  the  rebuke :  "Get  thee  behind 
me,  Satan,  thou  art  an  offense  unto  me,  for  thou 
savorest  not  the  things  that  be  of  God,  but  the 
things  that  be  of  men."  While  to  the  same 
church,  honeycombed  with  worldliness  and  stupe- 
fied by  indifference  with  its  resultant  dimness  of 
spiritual  vision,  any  vagary,  so  it  be  clothed  in 
specious  garb,  will  suffice  to  beguile  it  from  the 
simplicity  of  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints. 
Half  a  century  since,  in  the  days  of  the  great 
revival  of  1857,  when  the  power  of  God  in  the 
salvation  of  men  was  made  mightily  manifest  on 
this  continent,  when  the  eternal  realities  of  religion 
spoke  to  men's  inmost  souls,  and  were  of  the  very 
warp  and  woof  of  their  spiritual  being,  any  such 
insidious  attempt  to  undermine  their  faith  in  the 
authority  and  divinity  of  the  sacred  records  as 
has  been  witnessed  in  these  last  days,  would 
have  been  at  once  recognized  in  its  true  character. 

16 


CRITICISM    AND    THE    CHURCH 


To-day  its  most  radical  exponents  and  champions 
are  teachers  of  the  teachers,  sitting  in  the  high  seats 
of  the  synagogues,  loaded  down  with  all  manner 
of  incongruous  and  misdescriptive  academic  and 
ecclesiastical  honors  and  degrees  ;  while  their  half- 
fledged  disciples,  fearing  to  be  thought  uncultured 
traditionalists,  eager  to  be  abreast  of  "  modern 
thought,"  and  to  be  classed  as  "  new  theologians  " 
are,  after  a  clumsy  and  halting  fashion,  following 
as  close  behind  as  their  limitations  will  admit, 
holding  up  to  their  flocks  the  glories  of  evolution 
and  "the  survival  of  the  fittest" — a  motto  which, 
by  the  way,  bears  a  curious  family  resemblance 
to  that  other  :  "  Every  man  for  himself,  and  devil 
take  the  hindmost." 

The  condition  indicated  is  at  once  a  cause  and 
an  effect — an  effect  of  indifference,  and  a  cause 
of  more  indifference.  It  owed  its  entrance  to  a 
faith  weakened  by  worldliness ;  it  signalizes  its 
continuance  by  the  spread  of  a  practical  unbelief 
amounting  almost  to  bald  materialism.  We  read 
often  enough,  in  the  pages  of  our  religious  period- 
icals, of  laments  over  the  decay  of  vital  godliness 
and  the  impotence  of  the  church  in  reaching  the 
masses,  and  of  anxious  inquiries  into  the  cause  of 
the  defection.  One  cause,  at  any  rate,  ought  not 
to  be  far  to  seek.  For  while  complex  phenomena 
of  this  sort  can  never  be  attributed  to  the  opera- 
tion of  one  sole  and  exclusive  cause,  still  it  would 
b  17 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 


seem  to  be  beyond  question  that  the  absolute 
reversal  of  received  views  as  to  the  composition 
and  character  of  the  Scriptures  must  of  necessity 
be  profoundly  influential  in  unsettling  the  faith  of 
many,  and  thereby  lowering  the  tone  and  standards 
of  the  Christian  life,  and  loosening  the  exacting 
demands  and  obligations  of  a  high  spiritual  expe- 
rience. Indeed,  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  new 
thought  seem  to  recognize  this,  for  they  seek  to 
console  us  with  the  assurance  that  this  is  a  mere 
temporary  phase  of  doubt,  incident  to  and  in- 
separable from  a  time  of  flux  and  change ;  that  it 
will  in  the  end  work  itself  clear,  and  things  be 
all  the  better  for  it.  One  is  tempted  to  ask  : 
"  What,  in  the  meantime,  of  the  thousands  who,  by 
the  upheavals  and  uncertainties  of  this  transition 
period,  have  been  led  away  after  strange  gods  ?  " 
No  Christian  doubts  for  a  moment  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus  ;  but  that 
triumph  will  be  sorry  comfort  for  the  multitudes 
who,  following  these  new  guides,  have  erred  from 
the  faith  and  have  been  given  over  to  strong 
delusion  to  believe  a  lie. 

Of  course,  those  critics  who,  with  sublime  in- 
difference to  logical  consistency,  still  claim  the 
Christian  name  and  profess  the  Christian  faith, 
strenuously  protest  against  the  thought  that  the 
discrediting  of  the  Old  Testament  in  any  way 
affects  the  stability  of  the  foundations  of  our  belief 

18 


CRITICISM    AND    THE    CHURCH 


in  the  New.  But  that  kind  of  casuistry  which 
assents  to  the  premises  while  seeking  to  avoid  the 
force  of  the  conclusion  is  little  understood  and  less 
liked  by  the  common  people  ;  and  when  men  essay 
to  prove  that  the  statements  of  the  Bible  cannot 
lay  claim  even  to  the  ordinary  veracity  which 
obtains  between  man  and  man  in  their  mutual 
dealings,  and  yet  maintain  that  its  value  as  an  ex- 
position of  divine  truth  is  in  nowise  impaired,  the 
honest  man  is  apt  to  say  :  "  I  take  the  liberty  of 
differing  with  you  ;  and  if  you  act  as  you  think,  I 
should  prefer  to  deal  with  you  at  arm's  length." 

Attacks  upon  the  Bible  by  declared  atheists,  as 
before  suggested,  are  to  be  looked  for,  and  do  little 
harm.  The  Christian  is  forewarned  by  the  source 
whence  they  come,  and  is  thereby  forearmed 
against  them — usually  ignoring  them  altogether, 
regarding  their  perusal  as  a  misuse  of  time.  But 
when  they  emanate  from  reverend  fathers  in  God, 
authorized  teachers  and  defenders  of  the  faith — 
not  obscure  nonentities,  but  men  of  high  place  and 
prominence  in  the  church — he  may  be  excused  if 
he  views  them  with  much  bewilderment  and  with 
some  misgivings.  He  looks  with  wonder  upon 
propositions  advanced  by  these  clerics  equaling  in 
derogatory  significance  the  utterances  of  Paine,  or 
Hume,  or  Hobbes  of  Malmesbury,  and  he  says  : 
"  If  this  were  written  by  Colonel  Ingersoll,  it 
would  be  intelligible  ;  but  coming  from  men  with 

J9 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

1  Reverend  '  before  their  names  and  '  d.  d.'  after 
them,  what  am  I  to  think  ? " 

For  let  no  one  doubt  that  the  Christian  is  think- 
ing on  these  subjects.  He  is  thinking,  and  think- 
ing hard,  thousands  of  him  ;  and  some  day  his 
thinking  will  become  articulate  and  vocal — with 
results.  He  is  not  an  expert  linguist,  nor  a  skilled 
theologian,  nor  a  trained  logician  even  ;  but  never- 
theless he  has  a  logic  of  his  own,  the  stubborn 
logic  of  facts,  and  he  acts  upon  it.  He  can  detect 
anomalies  when  he  sees  them,  whether  they  be 
in  statute  books  or  in  coats  and  trousers ;  and,  in 
the  long  run,  he  does  not  follow  anomalies,  except 
in  the  way  of  pursuit,  and  then  only  with  the  fixed 
purpose  of  abolishing  them. 

Many  believers  whose  ideals  and  standards  had 
their  foundation  in  the  teachings  of  an  earlier  and 
simpler  generation,  are  of  the  settled  conviction 
that  the  church  has  fallen  on  evil  days — days  of  a 
decline  in  power  and  of  the  eclipse  of  faith.  And 
while  they  are  not  unmindful  of  the  warning  of 
Solomon  (or  Qoheleth,  as  the  case  may  be),  "  Say 
not  thou,  Why  is  it  that  the  former  days  were 
better  than  these  ?  for  thou  dost  not  inquire  wisely 
concerning  this";  they  nevertheless  conceive  that 
the  facts  are  too  patent  to  be  gainsaid.  On  the 
one  side,  they  see  a  decided  halt  in  the  numerical 
increase  of  the  church,  a  lack  of  old-time  love  for 
its  assemblies  and  its  worship,  a  marked  decline  in 

20 


CRITICISM    AND    THE    CHURCH 


old-time  religious  fervor,  and  an  almost  total  re- 
laxation of  its  hold  upon  the  masses ;  and  on  the 
other,  the  disintegrating  processes  of  the  higher 
criticism  in  active  exercise,  deleting  from  the 
record  promises  of  infinite  import,  dissolving  into 
thin  air  patriarchs  and  heroes  and  exemplars  of 
the  faith,  and  changing  the  face  of  Israel's  his- 
tory until  not  one  sign  or  token  of  divine  guidance 
or  divine  purpose  remains,  leaving  a  ruin  where 
once  the  tabernacle  of  the  Presence  stood.  And 
although  it  is  possible  that  these  may  be  mere 
haphazard  coincidences  without  nexus  or  inter- 
dependence, they  believe  that  an  intimate  causal 
relation  exists  between  these  two  sets  of  phenom- 
ena, and  that  the  first  is  inexplicable  except  as  the 
result  of  the  second ;  which  belief  the  present 
writer  is  free  to  affirm  that  he  shares  with  them. 


21 


II 

CRITICISM    IN   THE   OPEN 


The  Bible  is  in  every  one' s  hands.  The  critic  has  no 
other  Bible  than  the  public.  He  does  not  profess  to  have 
any  additional  documents  inaccessible  to  the  laity.  Nor 
does  he  profess  to  find  anything  in  his  Bible  which  the 
ordinary  reader  may  not  find.  — A.  Kuenen. 


Wellhausen's  "Prolegomena"  gives  the  English  reader 
for  the  first  time  an  opportunity  to  form  his  own  conclusions 
on  questions  which  are  within  the  scope  of  any  one  who 
reads  the  English  Bible  carefully,  and  is  able  to  think 
clearly,  and  without  prejudice,  about  its  contents. 

— Robertson  Smith. 

For  which  the  "English  reader"  ought  to  be  duly 
thankful,  even  though  he  may  be  of  opinion  that  that  same 
opportunity  has  been  open  to  every  one  of  the  class  named 
ever  since  the  Bible  was  first  translated  into  his  mother 
tongue. 


II 

CRITICISM    IN    THE    OPEN 

The  wayfaring  men,  though  fools,  shall  not  err  therein. 

— Isaiah.  S^'t. 

There  was  a  time,  not  many  years  since,  when 
the  battle  of  the  books  was  being  waged  behind 
closed  doors.  The  discussions  of  the  pundits 
engaged  in  the  conduct  of  the  controversy  in 
question  were,  perforce,  had  in  executive  session, 
and  for  a  long  period  only  faint  and  indistinct 
rumors  of  the  conflict  reached  the  ears  of  the 
outside  Christian  world.  The  position  was  taken 
that  the  nature  of  the  problem  was  such  that 
only  adepts  in  Hebrew,  Oriental  archaeology, 
and  kindred  branches  of  learning  had  any  right 
to  be  heard,  either  pro  or  contra,  in  regard  to 
the  processes  and  investigations  to  be  pursued, 
or  to  the  conclusions  deducible  therefrom  ;  and, 
indeed,  that  they  alone  were  capable  of  under- 
standing the  problem  when  stated,  the  process 
when  detailed,  and  the  conclusion  when  reached. 
And,  so  far  as  the  preliminary  discussions  were 
concerned,  depending  as  they  did  upon  technical 
questions,  there  was  much  force  in  this  claim. 

25 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

But  in  the  heat  of  the  dispute  one  important 
fact  seems  to  have  been  lost  sight  of,  wholly  on 
the  critical  side  and  partly  on  the  conservative, 
and  that  is  that  "  the  whole  congregation  of  Chris- 
tian people  "  are  necessary  parties,  with  vital  and 
inalienable  rights  and  interests  in  the  subject- 
matter  of  the  controversy,  which  can  neither  be 
waived  by  themselves  nor  overridden  by  others  ; 
and  that  sooner  or  later  it  must  be  referred  to 
them  in  such  wise  that  no  representative  character 
on  the  part  of  the  experts  can  either  take  from 
them  the  right  or  relieve  them  of  the  burden  of 
rendering  a  decision  upon  the  merits.  Not  as  to 
whether  the  Bible  is  the  veritable  word  of  God. 
That  question  is  not  an  open  one.  It  stands  ad- 
judged by  the  history  of  nineteen  Christian  cen- 
turies. But  as  to  whether  this  long-adjudicated 
issue  shall  be  reopened  at  the  bidding  of  a  band 
of  German  rationalists  and  their  English  and 
American  echoes.  To  what  end  ?  That  this  price- 
less heritage  of  immemorial  ages  may  be  broken 
to  pieces,  and  the  church  of  the  living  God  be 
persuaded  to  accept  in  its  place  as  salvage  from 
the  wreck  a  secular  history  of  Israel,  reconstructed 
along  the  lines  of  the  Darwinian  hypothesis  and 
the  evolutionary  philosophy  generally.  Sane  men 
do  not  ordinarily  part  with  a  valuable  inheritance 
on  such  terms. 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  day  is  not  far  distant 
26 


CRITICISM    IN    THE    OPEN 


when  the  church  will  awake  from  its  slumber  and 
will  pass  upon  the  claims  of  the  critics,  not  for- 
mally or  simultaneously,  perhaps,  but  none  the 
less  effectually  and  finally.  Already  the  matter 
has  passed  beyond  the  limits  of  the  esoteric  and 
the  recondite.  Criticism  has  come  out  into  the 
open,  so  that  those  who  will  may  measure  its 
dimensions,  may  see  what  it  is  with  the  light  of 
publicity  shining  upon  it,  and  may  judge  whether 
it  is  a  living  force  with  the  elements  of  perma- 
nency in  it,  or  only  a  simulacrum  which  the  wind 
driveth  away.  And,  as  Doctor  Johnston  has  shown 
with  admirable  clearness  in  the  opening  chapter  of 
his  recent  work,1  the  average  man  is  a  most  im- 
portant factor  in  the  solution  of  this  problem. 
Sir  Robert  Anderson,  indeed,  argues  with  great 
force  that  the  specialist,  with  his  expert  knowledge 
of  one  phase  of  the  subject  and  his  inevitable 
theory  to  support,  is  actually  put  at  a  disadvan- 
tage in  reaching  an  impartial  judgment  upon  the 
matter  as  an  entirety.2 

But  that  is,  of  course,  mere  heresy.  The  idea 
that  any  one,  other  than  an  expert  Hebraist, 
should  venture  to  dissent  from  their  conclusions, 
which  are  claimed  to  depend  upon  the  date  and 
analysis  of  ancient  Hebrew  documents,  is  one 
which  the  critics  would   view  with    lofty  scorn. 

1  "  Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man,"  p.  I  f. 

'  "Bible  and  Modern  Criticism,"  "Pseudo-Criticism." 

27 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

Would  they  admit  that  the  non-expert  is  under 
any  circumstances  competent  to  agree  with  them  ? 
If  not,  why  would  it  not  be  advisable  for  them 
to  avoid  the  vernacular  altogether  and  conduct 
their  discussions  in  the  original  tongues,  and  so 
effectually  exclude  the  vulgar  from  meddling  with 
matters  too  high  for  them  ? 

Be  that  as  it  may,  it  is  deemed,  the  critics  to 
the  contrary  notwithstanding,  that  one  of  the  rank 
and  file  who  claims  to  possess  the  ability  of  the 
ordinary  man  to  follow  a  train  of  reasoning  when 
it  is  put  into  intelligible  English  and  to  draw  valid 
inferences  therefrom,  but  who  makes  and  can 
make  no  pretensions  to  scholarship  of  any  sort,  is 
nevertheless  warranted  in  entertaining  decided 
views  on  the  invalid  methods  and  the  baneful  ten- 
dencies of  the  higher  criticism,  and  that  he  may 
without  undue  presumption,  offer  some  comments 
thereon  from  the  Christian  standpoint  in  attempted 
application  of  those  common-sense  principles  of 
reasoning  which  prudent  men  bring  to  bear  on  the 
hard  facts  of  life,  and  on  which  they  are  willing  to 
base  their  action  and  stake  their  material  welfare. 

At  the  outset  it  may  not  be  out  of  place  to 
make  some  preliminary  observations. 

i.  It  seems  unfortunate,  from  the  standpoint 
mentioned,  that  this  study  should  have  received 
the  name  it  bears,  and  that  its  exponents,  or 
at  least  those  among  them  who  still  profess  to  be 

28 


CRITICISM    IN    THE    OPEN 


Christians,  should  arrogate  to  themselves  the  title 
"  critic."  The  term  has  such  sinister  connotations 
that  its  application  to  believers  as  descriptive  of 
their  dealings  with  and  comments  on  the  word  of 
God  might  well  be  avoided,  unless  under  the  com- 
pulsion of  absolute  necessity,  if  for  no  other  reason, 
in  deference  to  universal  Christian  sentiment. 

It  may  be  objected  that  this  is  a  mere  quibble 
upon  a  word  of  well-understood  meaning  and  long- 
established  usage.  But  words  are  things  and 
names  are  powers,  and  phrases  are  arguments  ex- 
erting an  influence  far  weightier  than  their  bare 
etymological  significance  would  carry.  Even  in 
its  primary  meaning  of  "one  who  sits  in  judg- 
ment "  the  word  denotes  an  attitude  natural,  it 
may  be,  in  those  who  reject  the  authority  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  and  spurn  his  claims  to  headship,  but 
which  ill  befits  a  Christian  teacher  who,  although 
a  searcher  and  an  interpreter,  is  surely  not  a 
judge. 1  Judges,  whether  of  courts  or  of  cattle 
shows,  are  usually  chosen  in  a  regular  way  by  some 
competent  authority,  and  in  the  case  first  men- 
tioned the  exercise  of  their  judicial  functions  is 
hedged  about  by  precise  rule  and  precept  in  order 
that  their  decisions  may  be  based  on  the  principles 
of  the  law  of  which  they  are  interpreters,  and  not 
on  the  mere  arbitrary  dictates  of  a  wandering 
fancy.     Outside  the  ranks  of  the  higher  criticism 

1  Wace,    "Bible  and  Modern  Investigation,"  p.  73. 
29 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

the  only  judge  who  elects  himself  and  has  an  abso- 
lutely free  hand  is  Lynch,  J.  And  he,  with  his 
fine  contempt  for  the  rules  of  evidence,  together 
with  his  preternatural  sagacity  in  detecting  a 
horse  thief,  presents  quite  a  striking  parallel  to 
some  latter-day  critics  who,  bound  by  no  principle 
of  law  or  logic  can,  with  like  superhuman  insight, 
identify  six  words  of  the  Levitical  forger  imbedded 
in  a  narrative  antedating  by  half  a  millennium  the 
institution  of  the  priesthood. 

But  it  has  come  to  pass  that  in  general  use  its 
secondary  meaning  of  "  faultfinder "  has  over- 
shadowed the  etymology  of  the  word  "critic,"  and 
when  one  hears  that  some  production  or  other  is 
to  be  criticised,  he  expects  that  it  is  going  to  be 
picked  to  pieces.  Usually  he  is  not  disappointed, 
and  the  higher  the  critics  are  the  more  likelihood 
is  there  that  his  expectations  will  be  realized.  As, 
witness  their  treatment  of  the  Pentateuch,  which 
they  have  literally  "picked  to  pieces." 

And  that  it  is  under  this  latter  category  that  the 
critics  themselves  desire  to  come  is  evidenced 
plainly  enough  by  their  own  declarations.  No 
man,  however  profound  his  scholarship  or  keen 
his  literary  or  historical  insight  may  be,  can  lay 
claim  to  the  title  "critic,"  if  he  entertains  the  old 
views  concerning  the  nature  and  authority  of  the 
Bible.  1     And  when  the  origin  and  history  of  the 

1  Sinker,   "Higher  Criticism,"  pp.  2,  3,  83. 
3° 


CRITICISM    IN    THE    OPEN 


movement  are  considered,  no  good  reason  is  ap- 
parent why  any  Christian  should  care  to  assert 
such  a  claim.  Eichhorn,  the  originator  of  the 
phrase,  as  he  was  the  pioneer  in  the  study  of 
the  higher  criticism,  was,  as  Ewald  says,  one  to 
whom  the  Bible,  from  the  religious  view-point, 
was  throughout  a  sealed  book.1  His  chief  per- 
manent contribution  to  the  scheme  seems  to  have 
been  a  determined  effort  to  eliminate  the  super- 
natural from  both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 2 
And  the  subsequent  history  of  the  school  shows 
how  completely  it  has  fulfilled  the  promise  of  its 
youth  ;  for,  amid  all  the  kaleidoscopic  forms  and 
shifting  phases  which  criticism  has  assumed  dur- 
ing the  last  century,  it  has  been  consistently  true 
to  this  central  canon  of  interpretation,  until  to-day 
the  question  is  not  whether  the  Bible  is  divinely 
inspired  and  an  authentic  record  of  divine  guidance 
and  divine  intervention,  but  whether  it  is  worthy 
of  credence  at  all,  or  is  merely  a  mixture  of  myth 
and  marvel,  fraud  and  fable,  with  here  and  there  a 
grain  of  historical  wheat  hidden  in  the  vast  heap 
of  traditional  chaff.  Hostile  it  has  been  from  the 
beginning  and  hostile  it  will  remain  to  the  end  ; 
and  when  so-called  Christian  teachers  range  them- 
selves under  its  banner,  they  raise  presumptions 
against  their  own  fealty  which  call  for  evidence 

1  Urquhart,  "Insp.  and  Accuracy  of  Scrip.,"  p.  207. 
a  "Encycl.  Brit.,"  Vol.  VII.,  p.  789. 

31 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

in  rebuttal,  and  which  one  day  the  Christian  world 
may  require  at  their  hands,  and,  if  at  all,  accept 
their  loyalty  as  demonstrated  at  the  expense  of 
their  logic. 

2.  The  assumption  of  the  critic  to  act  in  so 
many  diverse,  not  to  say  incompatible  capacities, 
is  one  which  is  surely  open  to  serious  question,  if 
not  to  absolute  ridicule.  He  is,  first  of  all,  an  ex- 
pert, a  specialist  in  his  own  line — usually  a  man 
with  a  theory  to  support.  His  place  is  the  witness 
box,  and  it  is  his  to  testify  to  the  facts  ;  and  those 
who  have  been  in  any  degree  familiar  with  the 
course  of  legal  procedure  in  recent  years  will 
know  that  of  all  classes  of  evidence  expert  testi- 
mony is  regarded  by  the  courts  as  least  trust- 
worthy, as  most  open  to  suspicion,  and  as  calling 
for  the  severest  scrutiny. !  Indeed,  the  cases  are 
rare  in  which  standing  alone  the  opinions  of  ex- 
perts (and  their  testimony  seldom  amounts  to 
more),  would  be  regarded  as  a  sufficient  basis  for 
judicial  action.  The  critic  is,  then,  a  witness  ;  or, 
if  you  would  stretch  his  functions  to  the  utmost 
limit  of  legitimacy,  he  is  also  an  advocate  to  press 
by  argument  his  theory  as  to  the  facts  upon  the 
court.  But  he  is  not  satisfied  even  with  this 
double  r61e.  He  must  ascend  the  bench,  and  by 
his  charge  as  judge  throw  the  weight  of  the  court's 

1  Fitzjames  Stephen,  "Hist,  of  the  Criminal  Law,"  Vol.  I., 
P-  575  f. 

32 


CRITICISM    IN    THE    OPEN 


authority  into  the  scale  in  his  own  favor ;  then  as 
jury  render  a  verdict  in  accordance  with  his  origi- 
nal testimony  ;  and  finally,  as  sheriff,  execute  the 
sentence  of  dismemberment  imposed  by  the  court. ' 
A  most  convenient,  short-cut  method  this,  and  one 
calculated  to  discourage  overmuch  controversy.  In 
the  ordinary  walks  of  life  such  all-embracing  pre- 
tensions are  rarely  encountered,  and  when  they  are 
the  pretender  is  naturally  overwhelmed  with  de- 
served ridicule.  To  find  an  exact  parallel  one 
would  have  to  resort  to  the  pages  of  comic  opera, 
where  Pooh  Bah  was  not  only  the  Mikado's  prime 
minister,  but  also  held  every  other  office  in  sight 
that  was  worth  having. 

3.  Many  Christians  object,  and  strongly  object, 
to  both  the  phrase  and  the  practice  of  the  u  study 
of  the  Bible  as  literature."  Of  course,  from  the 
necessities  of  the  case  it  is  couched  in  terms  of 
human  speech,  and  uses  alphabetical  symbols  and 
grammatical  forms  as  the  servants  of  its  purpose, 
and  therefore  in  a  restricted  sense  it  may  be  called 
letters.  But  that  for  them  exhausts  its  relation  to 
the  literature  of  men  simply  as  such.  In  the  highly 
improbable  case  of  a  modern  critic  admitting 
that  certain  ancient  worthies  wrote  the  books  at- 
tached to  their  names,  that  would  still  be  an  incom- 
plete and  misleading  statement  unless  he  went 
further  and  said  that  these  holy  men  of  old  spake 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  "Modern  Criticism,"  pp.  72,  73. 
C  33 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  If  these 
books  are  to  mean  anything  worth  while  to  the 
Christian  it  must  be  because  they  are  human  utter- 
ances plus  direct  and  explicit  divine  inspiration  ; 
and  the  one  constituent  is  as  controlling  of  the 
category  to  which  they  belong  as  the  other.  When 
the  critic  assumes  to  ignore  the  latter  element,  and 
on  that  assumption  to  proceed  with  his  dissections 
as  though  the  whole  fact  were  before  him,  and  an- 
nounces his  final  estimate  as  covering  and  account- 
ing for  all  the  phenomena  of  the  case,  and  as  con- 
stituting a  complete  determination  of  all  the  issues 
involved,  then  the  phis  becomes  an  excrescence  and 
an  impertinence.  If,  however,  the  divine  agency 
is  admitted,  not  as  a  mere  empty  phrase,  but 
in  any  real  and  substantial  sense,  his  examination 
becomes  a  futile  attempt  to  solve  a  problem  with 
an  important  factor  absent,  and  the  result  reached 
is  as  valuable  and  as  edifying  as  though  one  should 
undertake  an  exhaustive  analysis  of  a  complex 
chemical  process  or  compound  without  regard  to 
its  base  or  its  principal  reaction  ;  or  as  though  an- 
other should  essay  to  give  a  complete  account  of 
the  revolutionary  conflict  with  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  and  the  conditions  which  led  to  its 
proclamation  left  out  of  the  reckoning ;  or  a  third 
should  write  a  life  of  George  Washington  deal- 
ing solely  with  his  career  as  a  land  surveyor,  and 
yet  purporting  to  explain  why  he  stood  first  in 

34 


CRITICISM    IN    THE    OPEN 


war,  first  in  peace,  and  first  in  the  hearts  of  his 
countrymen. 

The  study  of  the  Bible  as  literature  is  a  well- 
sounding  phrase.  It  seems  at  first  blush  to  be 
eminently  fair  and  reasonable.  But  when  its 
implications  are  taken  into  account,  then  its  true 
character  becomes  at  once  apparent  as  an  attempt 
to  prejudge  the  whole  case  in  a  manner  unfavor- 
able to  the  unique  authority  of  the  Scriptures. 
Among  the  criteria  to  be  applied  in  the  study  of 
human  history  would  be  surely  these  :  (i)  Miracles 
do  not  happen ;  and  (2)  Prophecy  does  not  pre- 
dict. Now,  when  the  literary  critic  finds  in  the 
Bible  instances  of  both  kinds,  i.  e.,  miracles  and 
predictive  prophecy,  what  does  he  do  ?  Accept 
them  as  natural  concomitants  of  a  divinely  ordered 
history  and  divinely  revealed  truth  ?  Not  at  all.  He 
strikes  the  first  out  of  the  record  as  incredible,  and 
condemns  the  second  as  made  after  the  event. 

It  is  true  one  critic  says  that  "  criticism  in  the 
hands  of  Christian  scholars  does  not  banish  or 
destroy  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament ;  it 
presupposes  it."1  But  this  is  an  affront  upon 
common  intelligence.     It  means  nothing  and  com- 

1  Driver,  "  Introd.  to  the  Literature  of  the  O.  T.,"  loth  ed., 
p.  xiii.  Some  trenchant  and  well-merited  comments  on  the  un- 
critical character  of  this  dexterous  evasion  are  made,  and  the 
fallacies  of  the  plea  exposed  by  Rev.  John  Thomas,  M.  A.,  of  Liver- 
pool, in  his  recent  work,  ' '  The  Organic  Unity  of  the  Pentateuch  ' ' ; 
a  book  well  worth  the  careful  consideration  of  those  who  think 
the  last  word  has  been  said  upon  Pentateuchal  criticism. 

35 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

mits  to  nothing.  For  the  writer  evidently  finds 
this  presupposed  divine  inspiration  to  be  no  bar  in 
the  way  of  reaching  conclusions  which  can  have  no 
other  meaning  than,  as  justly  stated  by  Chancellor 
Lias,  that  "the  Scriptures  in  their  present  form  are 
not  merely  tinged  with  inaccuracy,  but  are  plainly 
and  distinctly  false,  and  to  a  considerable  degree 
intentionally  false  from  one  end  to  the  other."  l 

In  what  condition  this  leaves  the  inspiration  "  pre- 
supposed "  by  the  critics  it  is  needless  to  state. 

1  Lias,  "Principles  of  Biblical  Criticism,"  p.  91. 


36 


Ill 


THE    OLD    BELIEF 


In  the  severe  discipline  that  followed  the  Fall;  in  the 
choice  of  a  single  family  to  be  the  depositary  of  the  belief 
in  the  One  True  God;  in  the  establishment  of  the  laws 
which  were  necessary  for  a  community  organized  on  that 
belief;  in  the  moral  education  of  the  people  of  Israel  by 
blessings  and  by  chastisements;  in  the  development  of  the 
inward  spirit  of  the  law  by  means  of  the  prophetic  writings 
until  the  purpose  of  God  stood  revealed  in  all  its  clearness 
in  the  person  and  life  of  Jesus  Christ — we  see  One  Mind 
manifest  throughout,  using  means  natural  and  supernatural 
as  it  seemed  best,  but  in  all  working  to  one  end — the  mani- 
festation of  God  as  infinite  Power,  infinite  Wisdom,  and 
infinite  Love.  — j%  J,  Lias. 


None  is  like  Jeshurun'  s  God, 

So  great,  so  strong,  so  high, 
Lo,  he  spreads  his  wings  abroad, 

He  rides  upon  the  sky. 
Israel  is  his  first-born  son, 

God,  the  almighty  God  is  thine, 
See  him  to  thy  help  come  down, 

The  excellence  divine. 

Thee  the  great  Jehovah  deigns 

To  succor  and  defend; 
Thee  the  eternal  God  sustains, 

Thy  Maker  and  thy  Friend. 
He  is  Israel's  sure  defense, 

Israel  all  his  care  shall  prove, 
Kept  by  watchful  providence 

And  ever-waking  love. 

—  C.   Wesley. 


Ill 

THE    OLD    BELIEF 

The  faith  which  was  once  delivered  to  the  saints. 

—Jude.  3  , 

The  declaration  of  those  things  which  were  once 
most  surely  believed  by  Christians  of  a  generation 
not  yet  wholly  departed,  would  seem  to-day  like 
echoes  of  a  far-off  and  half-forgotten  time.  An 
attempt  at  their  restatement,  not  with  the  system- 
atic precision  or  in  the  technical  terms  of  the 
professional  theologian,  but  after  the  simple  and 
inartificial  fashion  in  which  they  presented  them- 
selves to  the  devout  and  uncritical  believer  in 
those  earlier  and  happier  days,  will  show  to  what 
lengths  the  church  has  traveled  during  the  past 
thirty  years.  Advocates  of  progress  at  any  cost 
will  say,  in  the  direction  of  elevation  and  breadth 
of  view ;  others,  that  those  phrases  merely  stand 
for  vagueness  and  indifference,  stages  on  the  road 
to  the  desired  goal  of  quasi-religious  rationalism, 
a  church  without  dogma,  which  to  them  is  the 
same  thing  as  a  body  without  a  soul. 

These  older  Christians  believed  that  the  human 
race   sprang   from    the  loins  of  Adam,  who  came 

39 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

complete  and  perfect  from  the  hands  of  God,  in 
some  way  they  knew  not  how,  fashioned  after  the 
image  and  likeness  of  his  Creator.  From  this  first 
estate  Adam,  by  transgression,  fell,  losing  the 
image,  as  he  had  forfeited  the  favor  of  his  Maker 
and  bringing  upon  himself  and  upon  his  race  the 
condemnation  of  death.  But  even  while  sentence 
was  being  passed  the  infinite  mercy  of  God  coupled 
with  the  doom  the  hope  of  a  Deliverer.  This  hope, 
gathering  clearness  with  each  succeeding  age, 
renewed  in  the  prophecy  of  Noah  that  God  should 
dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem,  was  solemnly  con- 
firmed in  the  covenant  with  Abraham,  the  historic 
starting-point  of  definite  revelation,  and  further 
limited  in  the  line  of  Isaac  and  of  Israel,  his  son 
and  his  son's  son,  in  whose  seed  all  nations  of  the 
earth  were  to  be  blessed. 

From  that  time  forward,  to  quote  the  succinct 
and  yet  comprehensive  summary  of  Professor 
Robertson  : 

The  people  of  Israel  stood  in  a  peculiar  relation  to  God, 
and  received  from  him  special  intimations  of  his  will  and 
character,  and  were  by  him  peculiarly  guided  and  directed 
in  their  growth  into  a  nation,  and  in  their  existence  as  a 
State.  By  a  signal  display  of  divine  power  they  were  deliv- 
ered from  the  bondage  of  Egypt  and  led  into  the  desert  of 
Sinai,  where  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham  was  renewed 
with  awful  sanctions.  Upon  the  covenant  was  reared  the 
law,  ordaining  holiness  on  God' s  people,  fencing  round 
their  daily  life  with  ceremonial  prescriptions,  and  educating 

40 


THE    OLD    BELIEF 


their  spiritual  life  so  that  they  might  be  in  deed  as  in  ideal 
a  kingdom  of  priests,  an  holy  nation.  Up  to  this  ideal, 
however,  they  never  came.  On  the  contrary,  they  sinned 
under  the  very  shadow  of  Sinai ;  and  throughout  the  course 
of  their  journey  in  the  wilderness,  marked  as  it  was  by 
constant  tokens  of  divine  guidance,  they  exhibited  continual 
backsliding  and  fell  into  one  corruption  after  another. 
Even  when,  by  signal  displays  of  divine  favor,  they  were 
brought  into  the  promised  land  and  made  victorious  over 
its  inhabitants,  they  sinned  against  the  God  who  had 
favored  them,  and  conformed  to  the  practices  of  their 
neighbors.  Nevertheless  they  were  not  rejected,  nor  was 
their  education  interrupted.  A  series  of  prophets,  from 
Samuel's  time  onwards,  arose  to  testify  against  them  and 
to  plead  for  a  higher  life.  These  men,  with  one  voice, 
whether  in  the  northern  or  the  southern  kingdom,  tell  the 
same  tale  of  God' s  great  doings  for  his  people  in  the  past ; 
they  reprove,  rebuke,  exhort;  they  confront  kings  and 
people,  and  denounce  priests  and  false  prophets  alike — the 
burden  of  their  message  being  the  same  from  age  to  age. 
Nor  do  they  lose  faith  in  God's  promise.  As  troubles 
gather  about  the  nation,  their  reproof  of  sin  becomes  more 
stern,  their  enforcement  of  God' s  righteousness  more  em- 
phatic, but  their  trust  in  his  faithfulness  remains  unshaken. 
As  the  fabric  of  the  nation  falls  to  pieces,  their  views 
become  only  the  more  spiritual,  and  hope  lives  on  even 
in  captivity.  It  was  indeed  the  voice  of  prophecy  and  the 
belief  in  its  fulfillment  that  sustained  the  captives  in  Babylon 
and  stimulated  the  pious  under  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  to 
return  to  their  native  land,  and  there,  cured  finally  of 
idolatry,  to  set  up  the  worship  of  God  with  punctilious 
regard  to  the  precepts  of  the  old  law,  which,  during  their 
prosperity,  had  been  slighted.1 


1  "Early  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  31  f. 
41 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

To  Christians  of  the  time  mentioned  this  law  was 
not  only  precept  but  prophecy,  and  while  it  had 
primary  relation  to  the  life  and  conduct  of  Israel 
under  the  old  covenant,  it  had  also  a  forward  look, 
and  was  big  with  the  promise  of  a  new  and  better 
covenant  and  the  unfolding  of  a  larger  and  fuller 
revelation  of  God,  not  only  to  Israel,  but  to  the 
whole  world.  It  was  to  them  the  shadow  of  things 
to  come,  of  which  the  substance  was  Christ. 

They  saw,  moreover,  in  certain  characters  of 
the  Bible — Joseph,  Moses,  Aaron,  and  others — par- 
tial and  incomplete,  but  none  the  less  divinely 
ordained  types  of  Him  who  was  to  come.  More 
particularly  the  Mosaic  history  and  institutions, 
law,  ritual,  observances,  tabernacle,  and  priesthood, 
indeed  everything  that  was  basal  in  the  life  and 
history  of  the  chosen  race,  pointed  with  unerring 
precision  to  the  same  event,  and  were  prophecies 
in  act  and  fact  of  some  aspect  in  the  life  and  mis- 
sion of  our  divine  Lord,  or  were  illustrative  of 
cardinal  elements  of  gospel  truth.  The  paschal 
lamb  with  its  sheltering  blood  sprinkled  on  lintel 
and  doorpost  spoke  to  them  of  "  Christ  our  pass- 
over  who  was  sacrificed  for  us."  l  The  great  day 
of  atonement  with  its  interceding  priest,  bringing 
within  the  veil  the  blood  of  the  sin  offering,  be- 
came transparent,  and  they  saw  through  it  the 
form  of  One  greater  than  Aaron,  who,  being  both 

1  I  Cor.  5  :  7. 

42 


THE    OLD    BELIEF 


sacrifice  and  priest,  by  his  own  blood  entered  in 
once  into  the  holy  place  not  made  with  hands, 
even  into  heaven  itself,  to  appear  in  the  presence 
of  God  for  them,  having  obtained  eternal  redemp- 
tion for  all  who  should  believe.1 

And  so  on  through  all  the  details  of  the  sacri- 
ficial system  of  the  Levitical  law,  and  all  the  salient 
features  of  the  history  of  Israel — the  deliverance 
from  Egypt,  the  passage  through  the  Red  Sea,  the 
manna  in  the  wilderness,  the  water  from  the  smit- 
ten rock,  the  guiding  pillar  of  cloud,  the  brazen 
serpent,  the  entrance  into  the  promised  land — all 
headed  up  in  Christ  and  found  in  him  their  final 
and  complete  fulfillment. 

In  like  manner  to  him  gave  all  the  prophets 
witness.  He  was  the  burden  of  their  message, 
and  his  Spirit  being  with  them,  they  testified 
beforehand  of  the  manner  and  place  of  his  birth, 
of  the  time  of  his  appearing,  of  his  lineage  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh,  of  his  relation  to  the  Father,  of 
his  absolute  submission  to  the  divine  will,  of  his 
anointing  by  the  Spirit,  of  the  nature  of  his  re- 
deeming work,  of  his  vicarious  sufferings  and 
death,  and  of  the  glory  that  should  follow.  They 
saw  too  that  these  minute  and  intimate  correspond- 
ences were  not  confined  to  any  one  period,  nor 
exhibited  solely  in  any  one  class  of  Old  Testament 
writings,    but    ran   through   the  whole    course  of 

1  Heb.  9  :  io.      Moorehead  :   "Studies  in  Mosaic  Inst." 
43 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

sacred  history,  and  were  manifested  alike  in  law, 
annal,  psalmody,  prophecy,  and  apocalypse.  This, 
in  their  view,  negatived  any  assumption  that  they 
were  vague,  chance  coincidences,  or  such  unde- 
signed sequences  as  might  be  traced  through  any 
given  series  of  events,  and  evinced  a  unity  of  plan 
and  a  continuity  of  purpose  which  stamped  upon 
them  the  sign-manual  of  Deity,  and  referred  them 
unmistakably  to  the  determinate  counsel  and  fore- 
knovvlege  of  God. 

And  when  in  the  fullness  of  time  the  Only  Be- 
gotten of  the  Father  came  on  his  saving  mission 
to  this  world,  their  faith  was  that  he  lived,  suffered, 
died,  and  rose  again  "  according  to  the  Scriptures." 
To  them  the  Christian  revelation  was  no  isolated 
and  unrelated  phenomenon,  new-sprung  out  of 
nothing,  but  was  rooted  and  grounded  in  an  older 
covenant,  which  in  turn  was  confirmed  by  two 
immutable  things  wherein  it  was  impossible  for 
God  to  lie,  that  they  might  have  strong  consolation 
who  had  fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold  on  the  hope 
set  before  them. 

This  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God  they  regarded  as 
the  perfect  and  final  revelation  of  the  love  of 
God  to  man.  It  was  the  faith  once  for  all  de- 
livered to  the  saints,  full-orbed  and  complete,  as 
to  which  naught  could  be  added  nor  aught  taken 
away ;  admitting  of  no  change  and  susceptible  of 
no  improvement.  It  was  no  mere  intermediate 
44 


THE    OLD    BELIEF 


link  in  a  chain  of  natural  evolutionary  processes, 
no  germ  containing  simply  the  potentiality  of  de- 
velopment to  larger  and  finer  issues.  It  was  the 
topmost  apex  of  revealed  truth,  beyond  which 
there  could  be  no  ascent.  As  such  it  was  theirs 
to  reject  or  to  accept,  and  their  conviction  was 
that  upon  an  unfeigned  and  hearty  reception  of 
this  truth,  applied  and  vitalized  by  the  power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  sent  down  from  heaven,  there 
was  wrought  in  them  that  change  which  was  to 
make  them  meet  to  be  partakers  of  the  inherit- 
ance of  the  saints  in  light,  to  deliver  them  from 
the  power  of  darkness  and  translate  them  into  the 
kingdom  of  God's  dear  Son. 

They  believed  further  that  he  would  come  again, 
even  as  he  had  said,  and  that  this  coming  was  the 
hope  of  the  church,  for  which  all  true  Christians 
should  watch,  and  upon  which  hinged  the  res- 
toration of  Israel,  the  blessedness  of  the  world, 
and  the  final  triumph  of  good  over  evil.  And 
strange  to  say,  there  are  still  those  who  are  look- 
ing for  the  Master's  appearing,  and  who  daily  in- 
clude in  their  prayers  the  petition,  "  Even  so,  come, 
Lord  Jesus." 

It  is  entirely  plain  that  a  theology  based  on 
such  assumptions  and  proceeding  along  such  lines, 
is  hopelessly  out  of  touch  with  Christianity  ac- 
cording to  the  prevailing  mode.  The  high,  dry 
air  of  modern  Christian  culture  is  altogether  too 


45 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 


rarefied  for  crude  conceptions  of  the  kind  men- 
tioned to  thrive  in.  We  are  nothing  nowadays 
if  not  philosophical,  and  the  gospel,  to  have  any 
standing  at  all  in  scholastic  circles,  must  be  re- 
stated in  terms  of  the  latest  philosophy  of  origin 
or  history — in  other  words,  of  the  newest  popular 
adaptation  of  the  evolutionary  hypothesis.  And 
our  men  of  light  and  leading  are  to-day  engaged  in 
the  congenial  task  of  rescuing  the  "  sweet  secret 
of  authentic  Christianity  "  from  the  mass  of  myth 
and  dogma  under  which  it  has  lain  buried  during 
the  dark  ages  of  the  past  nineteen  centuries.  The 
old  beliefs,  however,  we  are  consolingly  told,  "  do 
not  die ;  the  Zeitgeist  breathes  on  them,  and  they 
are  changed."  They  are  indeed,  "into  something 
new  and  strange."  Although  perhaps  the  word 
"  change  "  is  hardly  descriptive  of  the  fate  which 
the  old  faith  has  met  at  the  hands  of  the  new 
philosophy. 


46 


IV 

THE   OLD    BOOK 


When  quiet  in  my  house  I  sit, 
Thy  book  be  my  companion  still, 

My  joy  thy  sayings  to  repeat, 
Talk  o'  er  the  records  of  thy  will, 

And  search  the  oracles  divine 

Till  every  heartfelt  word  be  mine. 

Oh,  may  thy  gracious  words  divine 

Subject  of  all  my  converse  be, 
So  shall  the  Lord  his  follower  join, 

And  walk  and  talk  himself  with  me  ; 
So  shall  I  all  his  presence  prove 
And  know  his  everlasting  love. 

—  C.    Wesley. 


IV 

THE    OLD    BOOK 

God  ...  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners  spake 
in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets. 

— Hebrews.  !•'• 

The  attitude  of  the  representative  Christian  of 
the  old-fashioned  type  toward  the  Book  was  no 
uncertain  one.  He  simply  received  it  fully  and 
unreservedly  as  the  written  word  of  God,  a  com- 
plete revelation  of  the  mind  and  will  of  God  to 
men,  an  infallible  rule  of  life,  an  authoritative 
standard  of  faith,  and  a  sole  and  ultimate  appeal  in 
all  matters  of  duty  and  doctrine. 

Even  though  in  his  days  the  rage  for  theorizing 
and  systematizing  had  not  attained  to  anything 
like  its  present  proportions,  many  theories  of  in- 
spiration were  from  time  to  time  formulated ;  but 
he  did  not  greatly  concern  himself  about  them. 
The  fact  of  inspiration  sufficed  for  him.  Any  at- 
tempt to  rule  upon  the  question  of  degrees  of  in- 
spiration within  the  book  he  would  have  at  once 
condemned  as  unprofitable  and  presumptuous. 
That  question,  if  such  an  one  had  been  mooted, 
he  would  have  pronounced  to  belong  to  the  secret 
D  49 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

counsels  of  Deity,  on  which  it  did  not  become  him 
to  dogmatize.  Whatever  inspiration  might  mean, 
to  him  it  was  in  all  places  and  for  all  purposes 
plenary,  and  a  sufficient  guaranty  that  what  he 
read  was  a  divinely  given  word  written  for  his 
learning  and  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof, 
for  correction,  for  instruction  in  righteousness, 
that  he  might  be  perfect,  thoroughly  furnished 
unto  all  good  works.  But  this  does  not  mean 
that  he  used  it  with  an  entire  lack  of  discrimina- 
tion, recognizing  no  relative  importance  or  appli- 
cability of  one  part  over  another,  but  consulting  it 
as  one  would  a  dream  book  or  a  magic  oracle,  as 
he  is  slanderously  reported  to  have  done.  Strange 
as  it  may  seem  to  an  arrogant  modern  pundit,  he 
did  not  altogether  take  leave  of  common  sense 
when  he  approached  the  study  of  Holy  Writ.  On 
the  contrary,  the  fear  was  ever  before  his  eyes 
that  he  might  through  human  ignorance  or  pre- 
sumption handle  it  deceitfully,  and  his  unceasing 
prayer  was  that  he  might  be  a  workman  needing 
not  to  be  ashamed,  rightly  dividing  the  word  of 
truth.  Of  course,  there  ever  existed  for  him  the 
danger  of  too  rigid  an  adherence  to  its  strict  let- 
ter in  violation  of  its  inner  intent.  But  of  this 
danger  he  was  not  ignorant,  and  as  he  read  he 
prayed  that  the  Lord  by  his  Spirit  would  shine 
upon  the  truths  of  his  word,  and  his  faith  was 
that  this  petition  was  heard  and  answered. 

5° 


THE    OLD    BOOK 


He  realized  too,  that  understanding  was  condi- 
tioned upon  obedience.  He  was  not  unmindful  of 
his  Lord's  words,  "  If  any  man  will  do  his  will,  he 
shall  know  of  the  doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God." 
And  he  knew  full  well  that  every  duty  left  un- 
done would  obscure  for  him  some  truth  he  would 
otherwise  have  known.  Commentaries  he  valued 
according  to  the  measure  of  the  evangelical  spirit 
evinced  and  the  experimental  knowledge  of  the 
spiritual  content  of  biblical  truth  manifested.  On 
the  scholastic  side  they  did  not  strongly  appeal  to 
him ;  but  on  the  whole  his  estimate  of  the  value 
of  the  word  was  so  high  that  he  was  infinitely 
more  interested  in  the  study  of  the  Bible  itself 
than  in  the  reading  of  books  about  the  Bible. 
And  he  did  read  his  Bible,  and  knew  it  from  be- 
ginning to  end.  This  knowledge  colored  his  con- 
ceptions of  life  and  duty,  molded  his  habits  of 
thought  and  action,  and  impressed  itself  upon  his 
forms  of  speech,  seasoning  his  conversation  with 
godly  salt.  His  delight  was  in  the  law  of  the 
Lord,  and  in  that  law  did  he  meditate  day  and 
night.     He  was  emphatically  a  man  of  the  book. 

The  charge  of  bibliolatry,  if  the  word  or  the 
taunt  had  been  in  vogue  in  his  day,  he  would  have 
indignantly  denied,  knowing  that  his  reverent  love 
for  the  Author  of  the  word  would  effectually  pre- 
vent him  from  belittling  the  light  itself,  because  of 
his  regard  for  the  medium  through  which  it  was 

5i 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

refracted,  or  from  yielding  to  either,  the  devotion 
due  to  its  Source,  the  supreme  object  of  his  adora- 
tion and  service.  As  a  choice  of  evils,  however, 
he  would  much  rather  have  had  the  reputation  of 
a  bibliolater  than  that  of  a  biblioclast. 

The  fact  that  its  contents  were  in  matter  and  in 
form  as  varied  as  the  manifold  activities  and  cir- 
cumstances of  human  life  presented  no  difficulties 
to  his  mind.  For  whether  he  read  history,  law, 
ritual,  biography,  allegory,  homily,  apothegm, 
hymnody,  prophecy,  or  apocalypse  in  its  pages,  he 
clearly  perceived  under  all  diversity  of  mode  the 
unity  of  one  informing  Spirit  and  through  all  the 
intricacies  of  the  pattern  he  reverently  traced  the 
master-hand  of  the  great  designer,  knowing  that 
it  was  God  who  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers 
manners  spake  in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by 
the  prophets.  Though  many  pens  transcribed  the 
message  as  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  seer  and 
singer  and  historian  from  age  to  age,  he  saw  the 
sign  manual  of  its  author  and  finisher  on  every 
line,  convinced  as  he  was  that  the  prophecy  came 
not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man,  but  that  holy 
men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the 
Holy  Ghost.  He  was  verily  assured  that  through 
all  its  varieties  of  form,  of  subject,  of  treatment, 
the  same  unalterable  and  eternal  purpose  ran — to 
declare  the  mind  of  God  and  to  set  forth  to  men 
the  way  of  life — so  that  whatsoever  things  were 

52 


THE   OLD    BOOK 


written  aforetime  were  written  for  his  learning, 
that  he,  through  patience  and  comfort  of  the 
Scriptures,  might  have  hope.  In  the  history  and 
utterances  of  patriarch  and  lawgiver  and  priest 
and  prophet  he  beheld  the  initial  and  preparatory 
stages  of  the  revelation  of  the  living  God ;  he 
heard  the  one  voice  speaking  the  living  word 
through  many  messengers  until  it  reached  its 
consummation  in  the  incarnate  Word,  the  word 
made  flesh  and  dwelling  among  men,  whose  glory 
they  beheld — the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of 
the  Father — full  of  grace  and  truth.  To  him  all 
Hebrew  scripture  was  eloquent  of  Christ,  leading  to 
Christ,  resting  in  Christ,  and  paling  before  Christ, 
as  the  lesser  before  the  greater  glory. '  And  this 
was  true  not  only  of  the  Messianic  prophecies, 
commonly  so  called,  but  of  all  Scripture,  so  that 
he  could  say  with  Dean  Alford :  "  The  whole 
Scriptures  are  a  testimony  to  Him  ;  the  whole  his- 
tory of  the  chosen  people,  with  its  types,  its  law, 
and  its  prophecies  is  a  showing  forth  of  Him." 
With  a  habit  akin  to  that  of  the  ancient  seers  he  in- 
quired and  searched  diligently  what  or  what  manner 
of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them  did 
signify  when  it  testified  beforehand  the  sufferings 
of  Christ  and  the  glory  that  should  follow. 

He  would  be,  indeed,  surprised  to  learn,  as  we 
are  now  told  by  a  distinguished  modern  exegete, 

1  Pierson,  "Many  Infallible  Proofs,"  p.  263. 
53 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

that  in  so  doing  he  became  a  mere  flatterer  of  his 
Lord,  overdoing  typology  by  spinning  plausible 
allegories  and  assiduously  polishing  each  rite  and 
institution  of  the  Jewish  law  in  the  attempt  to  make 
it  a  mirror  of  him  and  his  sacrifice,  and  without 
moral  insight  or  real  devotion  heaping  upon  him 
indiscriminately  all  the  titles  of  Old  Testament  his- 
tory, and  symbolizing  every  detail  of  Jewish  worship 
so  as  to  find  in  them  a  proof  of  his  divinity.1  But 
the  unchristian  imputation  of  unworthy  motives 
he  would  have  passed  over  in  silence  as  beneath 
his  notice.  Nor  would  the  jaunty  condemnation 
of  his  methods  have  deterred  him  from  prosecuting 
his  labor  of  love  in  following  out  his  Lord's  in- 
junction: "  Search  the  Scriptures,  for  they  are 
they  which  testify  of  me."  And  as  between 
Henry  Alford  and  George  Adam  Smith,  he  would 
not  for  one  moment  have  hesitated  to  decide  which 
one  most  truly  breathed  his  Master's  spirit,  or 
against  whom  the  lack  of  "  moral  insight  or  real 
devotion  "  could  properly  be  charged.  And  this, 
notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  latter  felicitates 
himself  upon  his  superior  perspicacity  in  discover- 
ing types  of  Christ  where  he  says  no  one  ever 
thought  of  looking  for  them  before — namely,  in 
the  "  Song  of  Deborah  "  and  "  David's  Dirge  upon 
Saul  and  Jonathan."2 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  "Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  p.  146. 

2  Smith,  Op.  at.,  p.  147. 

54 


THE   OLD    BOOK 


Critical  methods,  as  the  term  is  understood  to- 
day, he  would  surely  have  considered  incompatible 
with  his  reverence  for  the  word  of  God,  and  he 
most  certainly  would  not  have  traveled  to  Ger- 
many to  borrow  from  avowed  unbelievers  and 
rationalists  the  apparatus  with  which  to  conduct 
his  researches  and  the  canons  of  interpretation  by 
which  his  conclusions  were  to  be  governed.  In- 
deed, the  only  critical  method  which  he  would 
have  regarded  as  either  fitting  or  wholesome  was 
that  employed  by  the  Bereans,  who  received  the 
word  with  all  readiness  of  mind  and  searched  the 
Scriptures  daily  whether  these  things  were  so. 

He  realized,  moreover,  his  absolute  dependence 
upon  the  light  and  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for 
a  right  understanding  of  its  true  meaning  and  in- 
tent. And  he  never  approached  its  study  without 
breathing  the  spirit  of  the  psalmist's  prayer : 
"  Open  thou  mine  eyes  that  I  may  behold  won- 
drous things  out  of  thy  law."  A  verse  from  the 
hymnody  of  that  period  expresses  truly  the  general 
conviction  of  Christians  in  that  regard : 

Still  we  believe,  almighty  Lord, 

Whose  presence  fills  both  earth  and 
heaven, 

The  meaning  of  the  written  word 
Is  by  thine  inspiration  given. 

Thou  only  dost  thyself  explain 

The  secret  mind  of  God  to  man. 

55 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

With  whatever  purpose  he  pondered  its  pages, 
whether  educational,  devotional,  or  for  homiletic 
use,  he  always  essayed  its  interpretation  with  the 
prayer  that  God  might  spare  the  hand  put  forward 
to  touch  his  ark,  and  "  with  a  sense  of  utter  weak- 
ness before  the  power  of  his  word,  and  inability  to 
sound  the  depths  even  of  its  simplest  sentence."  1 

This  reverential  habit  naturally  determined  his 
attitude  toward  the  difficulties  and  obscurities 
which  from  time  to  time  confronted  him.  He 
never  dreamed  of  attributing  these  difficulties  to  a 
lack  of  harmony  or  of  divine  direction  on  the  part 
of  the  biblical  writers.  They  might  be  formidable, 
but  he  was  persuaded  that  they  were  soluble ;  and 
that  the  defect  lay  in  his  own  ignorance,  and  not 
in  the  fallibility  of  the  word.  He  was  content  to 
let  obscurities  remain  in  darkness  until  in  his  own 
good  time  God  should  be  pleased  by  his  Spirit  to 
shine  upon  them  ;  and  this,  not  for  the  mere  satis- 
faction of  his  curiosity,  but,  when  necessary,  for 
his  spiritual  growth  and  sustenance,  or  for  guidance 
in  the  path  wherein  he  was  called  to  tread.  Resolv- 
ing discords  by  destroying  the  harpstrings,  he  was 
not  sufficiently  "  advanced "  in  those  uncritical 
days  to  appreciate. 

He  was  an  eager  student  of  the  prophetic  word  ; 
and  while  he  fully  recognized  in  it  the  presence  of 

1  Dean  Alford,  quoted  by  Sir  Robert  Anderson,  in  "The  Bible 
and  Modern  Criticism,"  p.  13. 

56 


THE    OLD    BOOK 


an  element  of  even  greater  importance  than  that 
of  prediction,  he  still  cherished  the  testimony  of 
fulfilled  prophecy  as  a  valuable  item  of  evidence  of 
the  divine  origin  of  revealed  religion,  if  such  ex- 
ternal support  were  needed.  It  was  a  matter  of 
faith  with  him  that  the  secrets  of  the  Lord  had 
been  revealed  to  the  prophets  who,  whether  wit- 
ting or  unwitting,  lifted  the  veil  of  the  future  with 
an  unerring  precision  altogether  beyond  the  utmost 
reach  of  human  prescience;  that 

Thoughts  beyond  their  thought 
To  those  high  bards  were  given  ; 

that,  in  short,  the  voice  of  Him  who  sees  the  end 
from  the  beginning  spoke  in  and  through  them  of 
the  things  which  should  be  thereafter.  And  as  he 
read  in  the  pages  of  history  what  was  to  him 
abundant  confirmation  of  the  express  fulfillment  of 
many  of  these  predictions,1  an  element  of  stability 
was  imparted  to  his  comfortable  assurance  that  not 
one  jot  or  tittle  should  pass  from  the  word  until 
all  should  be  fulfilled. 

Of  course,  he  would  be  chided  by  the  "  Chris- 
tian critic  "  of  to-day  for  his  mistaken  view  of  the 
function  and  scope  of  prophecy  as  one  worthy  only 
of  an  age  of  superstition  and  credulity.  He  would 
be  informed  that  the  predictive  is  an  altogether 
negligible  quality   in  prophecy,  if  indeed  it  ever 

1  See  Pierson  :    Op.  cit.,  pp.  37-78,  1 85-2 14. 

57 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

connoted  such  a  quality  at  all ;  that  it  was  a  vulgar 
use  of  the  name  "prophet"  to  employ  it  as  de- 
scriptive of  "  one  who  foretells  the  future  "  ;  and 
that  "  of  this  meaning  it  is,  perhaps,  the  first  duty 
of  every  student  of  prophecy  earnestly  and  stub- 
bornly to  rid  himself." l  For,  to  the  scientific 
exegetes  of  the  hour,  everything  which  savors  of 
the  supernatural  is  a  feature  to  be  "  earnestly  and 
stubbornly  "  combated.  Judged  by  their  rule,  the 
prophets  were  not  foretellers  but  forthtellers — 
simply  righteous  men  who  had  higher  "concep- 
tions "  of  God  than  their  neighbors,  a  wide  and 
clear  outlook  upon  their  times,  a  keen  eye  for  the 
implications  of  facts,  and  sound  judgment  as  to 
the  inexorable  logic  of  events,  whose  utterances 
were  directed,  and  substantially  limited,  to  their 
immediate  audience  and  to  the  evils  and  needs  of 
the  then  present  occasion  ;  faithful  preachers,  in  a 
word,  popular  or  unpopular  according  to  the  tenor 
of  their  message. 

Now,  if  this  be  all  that  prophecy  means,  there 
does  not  seem  to  be  any  good  reason  why  the 
prophetic  canon  should  ever  have  closed  ;  or  why 
its  bulk  might  not  be  from  time  to  time  augmented 
by  such  utterances  as  Doctor  Parkhurst's  sermons 
on  municipal  corruption,  and  the  ecclesiastico-legal 
portions  of  the  book  enriched,  even  at  this  late  date, 
by  the  inclusion  of,  say,  Doctor  Briggs'  discourse 

1  Smith  :  "  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  II, 

58 


THE   OLD    BOOK 


on  "  Episcopal  Orders  and  the  Apostolical  Suc- 
cession." This  would  only  be  following  the  recent 
suggestion  of  a  canon  of  the  Church  of  England 
that  parts  of  the  Old  Testament  should  be  removed 
from  its  lectionary,  and  selections  from  religious 
literature  substituted  in  their  place. 

Of  course,  the  Christian  of  the  time  and  type 
mentioned  would  have  been  the  first  to  admit  that 
prophetic  gifts  of  a  sort  survived  through  all  the 
ages  of  the  church.  Indeed,  he  would  have  in- 
sisted that  all  true  preaching  partook  of  the  nature 
of  prophecy.  Only,  he  would  have  been  careful, 
in  defining  the  term,  to  limit  it  to  that  spiritual 
insight  which  is  at  once  the  call  and  the  qualifica- 
tion of  the  preacher  to  expound  and  enforce  the 
written  word.  And  he  would  in  no  wise  have 
thought  of  elevating  him  to  a  parity  with  those 
Hebrew  prophets,  whose  divinely  dictated  oracles 
formed  an  integral  part  of  that  indivisible,  organic 
whole  which  we  name  "  the  revelation  of  God  in 
Christ  Jesus,"  of  which  revelation  the  Bible  is 
the  inspired  and  infallible  record.  On  the  other 
nand,  he  would  have  resisted  just  as  strongly  any 
attempt  to  lower  scriptural  prophecy  to  the  level 
of,  or  place  it  in  the  same  category  with,  any 
extra-canonical  utterance,  however  exalted  or  edi- 
fying it  might  be.  He  was  no  eulogist  of  igno- 
rance, nor  ever  looked  upon  it  as  the  "  mother  of 
devotion."     On  the  contrary,  he  welcomed  all  the 

59 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

light  which  consecrated  learning  and  expository 
genius  could  throw  upon  the  meaning  of  the  word  ; 
and  he  thankfully  counted,  in  the  fellowship  of 
those  like-minded  with  him,  a  goodly  company  of 
scholars  with  names  as  eminent  as  any  that  were 
ever  inscribed  on  the  beadroll  of  fame. 

But  learning  and  scholarship  were  of  use  to  him 
only  when  they  were  the  handmaids  of  piety.  To 
godless  erudition,  he  would  have  said,  "  Thou  hast 
neither  part  nor  lot  in  this  matter."  And  he  would 
have  questioned  its  ability  to  apprehend  even  the 
alphabet  of  revelation.  On  the  other  hand,  he 
was  quick  to  recognize  the  presence  of  profound 
spiritual  insight  and  sound- biblical  knowledge  in 
those  whom  the  world  classed  as  unlettered.  For 
he  remembered  that  in  Pentecostal  days  the  bold- 
ness of  "  ignorant  and  unlearned  men  "  confounded 
the  wisdom  of  the  Sanhedrin  ;  and  he  believed 
that  the  same  Spirit  that  moved  them  was  still 
present,  and  potent,  and  operative  upon  the  hearts 
of  God's  children,  irrespective  either  of  the  pres- 
ence or  the  lack  of  what  men  call  education. 

He  would  have  held  in  light  esteem  the  assidu- 
ous labors  of  the  modern  critics  in  their  attempts 
to  account  on  natural  grounds  for  the  way  in  which 
this  or  that  portion  of  the  Bible  came  to  be  writ- 
ten ;  while  their  efforts  to  "  fit  the  text  to  the 
occasion"  by  the  projection  of  hypothetical  " his- 
torical settings,"  he  would  have  characterized  as 

60 


THE    OLD    BOOK 


wild  surmise  and  riotous  imagination,  unchastened 
by  reverence  and  without  foundation  in  fact.  He 
was  vastly  more  concerned  to  be  familiar  with  the 
word  as  it  stood,  so  that  by  God's  help  he  might 
translate  its  teachings  into  character  and  conduct, 
and  be  fittingly  equipped  to  be  a  cup-bearer  of  the 
water  of  life  to  a  dying  world. 

This  was  his  regimen,  and  it  bred  giants  ;  men 
of  whom  the  world  was  not  worthy,  who  loved  not 
their  lives  unto  the  death,  who  resisted  unto  blood, 
earnestly  contending  for  the  faith  once  delivered 
unto  the  saints,  and  who  could  say  at  the  close  of 
their  warfare,  "  I  have  fought  a  good  fight."  The 
sole  weapon  with  which  they  went  forth  conquer- 
ing and  to  conquer,  was  the  sword  of  the  Spirit, 
which  is  the  word  of  God. 


61 


THE   NEW   HISTORY 


The  origination  of  the  monotheistic  conception  in  the 
prophets  of  the  eighth  century  would  be  as  great  a  puzzle 
as  its  origination  in  the  days  of  Abraham.  By  no  process  of 
development  can  we  evolve  any  of  the  Belim  into  Jehovah, 
the  lofty  and  holy  One  inhabiting  eternity,  ruling  wisely  in 
heaven  and  justly  upon  earth.  The  prophetic  writings  of 
the  eighth  century  are  unaccountable  unless  as  the  out- 
growth of  a  long  previous  course  of  reflections  upon  higher 
than  heathen  beliefs.  If  Hebrew  religion  started  from  the 
idea,  however  crudely  apprehended,  of  the  unity  of  God, 
the  creator  and  ruler  of  the  world,  then  the  truths  pro- 
claimed by  Amos  and  Isaiah,  and  the  clearer  perception  of 
these  truths  expressed  by  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  are  natural 
developments  of  the  original  faith.  If  otherwise,  the  proph- 
ets are  personalities  as  inexplicable  as  Abraham  himself,  and 
their  teaching  is  indeed  "as  great  a  psychological  and  moral 
mystery  as  any  of  the  miracles  recorded  in  Scripture." 

— Archibald  Scott. 


THE    NEW    HISTORY 

As  for  this  Moses,  .  .  we  wot  not  what  is  become  of  him.    ■ 

— Exodus.  3^' ' 

We  have  changed  all  that.  In  educated  circles 
to-day  neither  the  old  belief  nor  the  old  book  has 
any  standing  in  court,  even  with  those  who  give  a 
qualified  and  provisional  assent  to  a  catena  of  neb- 
ulous, subjective  speculations  which  they  dignify 
by  the  name  of  the  philosophy  of  the  Christian 
religion.  Culture,  faith,  and  philosophy  must  at  all 
hazards  coincide ;  and  if  there  must  needs  be  a  clash 
it  will  be  neither  culture  nor  philosophy  which  will 
go  by  the  board.  The  fad  of  the  hour  is  a  brand 
new  history  of  the  human  race  and  of  the  origin 
and  growth  of  religion,  warranted  to  harmonize 
with  the  most  extravagant  of  all  the  protean  forms 
which  the  evolutionary  theory  can  by  any  possi- 
bility assume. 

Once  it  was  said  of  man,  "  God  created  man 
in  his  own  image ;  in  the  image  of  God  created 
he  him,"  and  it  was  accepted  as  an  accurate,  if 
summary,  account  of  his  origin.  But  we  know 
better  now. 

e  65 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

The  plain  truth — and  we  have  no  reason  to  hide  it — is  that 
we  do  not  know  the  beginnings  of  man' s  life,  of  his  history, 
of  his  sin  ;  we  do  not  know  them  historically  on  historical 
evidence  ;  and  we  should  be  content  to  let  them  remain  in 
the  dark  until  science  throws  what  light  it  can  upon  them.1 

That  is  to  say,  we  must  turn  our  backs  upon 
Genesis,  and  in  the  pages  of  Darwin  and  Haeckel 
find  as  the  progenitor  of  the  race,  not  Adam,  cre- 
ated in  the  image  of  his  Maker,  but  a  hairy  biped, 
probably  arboreal  in  his  habits,  with  pointed  ears 
and  prehensile  toes,  and,  perhaps,  a  tail ;  which 
appendage,  if  he  lived  in  trees,  was  certainly  a 
convenience.  The  fall  of  man  never  happened  ; 
or,  if  there  was  a  fall,  it  was,  as  a  celebrated 
preacher  once  said,  a  fall  upwards.  Sin,  instead 
of  being  a  willful  transgression  of  express  divine 
command,  becomes  a  mere  defect  in  the  adjust- 
ment of  the  organism  to  its  environment,  an  in- 
evitable and  indispensable,  if  not  indeed  benefi- 
cent constituent  of  human  nature  in  its  upward 
struggle  ;  an  illustrative  instance  of  the  "  soul  of 
good  in  things  evil,"  and  in  the  final  event  to  be 
educated  and  bred  out  of  the  race  much  as  one 
would  by  careful  selection  and  tendance  breed  de- 
fects out  of  and  desirable  qualities  into  a  flock  of 
merinos  or  a  herd  of  Jersey  cattle. 

In  like  manner,  leaving  our  Saviour's  life  and 
mission  out  of  the  question  for  the  moment,  there 

1  Professor  Denny,  " Studies  in  Theology,"  p.  79. 
66 


THE    NEW    HISTORY 


has  never  been  any  revelation  of  God  to  men 
definitely  and  distinctly  recognizable  as  such.  In 
place  of  this  we  have  from  the  beginnings  of  his- 
tory and  far  beyond,  human  conceptions  of  God 
innumerable,  ranging  from  the  most  degraded 
forms  of  fetichism  to  the  "  ethic  monotheism"  of 
the  later  Hebrew  prophets ;  no  one,  so  far  as  ex- 
ternal authority  goes,  being  entitled  to  claim  pref- 
erence over  any  other,  inasmuch  as  all  are  alike 
destitute  of  objective  reality.  Each  man  thus,  or 
group  of  men,  is  the  creator  of  his  or  its  own 
deity ;  and  the  parody  :  "  So  man  created  God  in 
his  own  image,  in  the  image  of  man  created  he 
him,"  flippant  and  profane  though  it  be,  is  never- 
theless absolutely  true  to  the  facts  of  the  case 
according  to  the  requirements  of  the  theory  under 
consideration. 

And  since  there  is  no  room  for  a  direct  and 
authentic  communication  from  God  to  men  in  this 
scheme  there  was  of  course  no  divine  call  of 
Abraham  ;  if,  indeed,  such  a  personage  ever  ex- 
isted. On  this  latter  point  there  is  some  diver- 
gence between  the  critics,  the  difference,  however, 
being  without  real  significance.  The  German 
critic,  who  holds  the  center  of  the  field  to-day,  re- 
gards him  as  a  late  invention,  a  fictitious  person 
who,  even  in  the  days  of  Amos,  had  not  reached 
the  same  stage  as  Isaac  and  Jacob. l     One  Scotch 

1  Wellhausen,  "Prolegomena,'"  etc.,  p.  320. 

67 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

follower,  less  logical  and  not  so  thorough  in  his 
zeal  for  destruction,  admits  a  critical  reaction  in 
favor  of  recognizing  the  personality  of  Abraham. l 
On  what  evidence  this  reaction  rests  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  conjecture.  He  adduces  none;  so  it  is 
probably  due  to  sheer  kindliness  on  his  part  and  a 
dislike  for  literary  homicide  unless  it  is  absolutely 
necessary.  Even  so  Abraham  is  a  name  and 
nothing  else ;  for  the  writer,  with  the  air  of  one 
who  has  reached  the  end  of  his  tether  in  the  way 
of  compromising  admissions,  goes  on  to  caution 
us  against  harboring  the  delusion  that  the  patri- 
archal narratives  contain  more  than  "  a  substratum 
of  actual  personal  history."  And  then  with  naive 
confidence  he  asks,  "  But  who  wants  to  be  sure  of 
more  ?  Who  needs  to  be  sure  of  more  ?  " 2  He 
must  be  a  highly  unreasonable  person  who  would 
"ask  for  more"  after  such  a  magnanimous  con- 
cession to  "  traditionalist  "  weaknesses. 

With  the  history  of  the  patriarchs  fall  the  divine 
revelations  and  promises  of  which  it  forms  the 
record ;  and  whether  they  were  mere  names  or 
actual  persons  matters  little  so  far  as  their  connec- 
tion with  revealed  religion  is  concerned.  If  they 
existed  at  all  they  were  rank  idolaters  probably  of 
a  rather  low  type.  For  many  centuries  later  the 
religion  of  their  putative  descendants  was  still  only 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  "  Modern  Crit.  and  Preaching  of  O.  T.,"  p.  107. 

2  Ibid. 

68 


THE    NEW    HISTORY 


"a  polytheism  with  an  opportunity  for  monotheism 
at  the  heart  of  it "  ' — whatever  in  particular  that 
extraordinary  phrase  may  happen  to  mean ;  per- 
haps that  possessing  a  favorite  tribal  deity  made  it 
easier  for  them  by  degrees  to  reach  the  point  of 
denial  of  deities  of  other  tribes.  So  Mormonism 
might  be  called  polygamy  with  an  opportunity  for 
monogamy  at  the  heart  of  it,  the  Mormon  becom- 
ing gradually  so  enamored  of  his  favorite  wife  that 
he  is  finally  moved  to  discard  the  others  on  her 
account.     Truly,  if  the  critics  are  right, 

God  moves  in  a  mysterious  way 
His  wonders  to  perform. 

The  existence  of  Moses  seems  to  be  pretty  gen- 
erally conceded.  The  writer  just  quoted  says  that 
no  one  has  ever  doubted  it.  But  in  this  he  is  mis- 
taken, for  M.  Maurice  Vernes  characterizes  the 
great  lawgiver  as  a  post-exilic  creation  of  the  law- 
yers of  the  Judean  restoration.  His  leadership  of 
the  Israelites  in  their  escape  from  Egyptian  bond- 
age seems  also  to  be  accepted,  although  at  least 
one  critic  has  been  found  to  deny  that  Israel  ever 
sojourned  in  Egypt.2  When  we  inquire  into  his 
connection  with  their  religion,  however,  we  are  on 
more  uncertain  ground.  For  while  Kuenen  says 
that  the  germs  of  the  higher  consciousness  of  God 

1  Smith,  Op.  cit.,  p.  131. 

2  Stade,  "Geschichte  der  Volkes  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  129. 

69 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

were  present  in  the  Mosaic  age,1  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  Israelites  at  that  time,  and  for  long 
centuries  thereafter,  were  polytheists,  and  that 
Jehovah  was  no  more  to  them  than  Chemosh  was 
to  Moab  or  Milcom  to  the  Ammonites.2  This 
consciousness,  then,  can  hardly  have  been  of  a 
very  elevated  type.  Indeed,  Wellhausen  claims  that 
for  Moses  to  have  given  them  enlightened  concep- 
tions of  God  would  have  been  to  offer  them  a 
stone  instead  of  bread,  and  that  in  that  particular 
he  probably  allowed  them  to  continue  in  the  same 
way  of  thinking  with  their  fathers. 3 

There  appears  to  be  an  intimation  here  that 
Moses  himself  occupied  a  more  exalted  plane, 
although  the  source  of  his  own  superior  knowledge 
is  not  suggested.  But  the  idea  that  he  was  the 
depositary  of  an  immediate  divine  revelation  and 
the  medium  through  which  a  divinely  enacted 
body  of  law  was  to  be  promulgated  is  a  mistaken 
one,  wholly  unsupported  by  evidence ;  and  any 
statement  to  the  contrary  in  the  record  is,  to  put 
it  charitably,  a  mere  projection  of  very  late  con- 
ceptions into  very  early  times,  or,  to  call  things 
by  their  right  names,  the  wholesale  fabrication  of 
fictions  under  the  guise  of  history. 

1  The  germ  theory  does  certainly  crop  out  in  unexpected  places. 

2  Smith,  Op.  cit.,  p.  151 ;  Kuenen,  "National  Religions," 
p.  116. 

3  ''■Prolegomena"  etc.,  p.  437. 

70 


THE    NEW    HISTORY 


So,  then,  in  no  real  sense,  certainly  in  no  unique 
sense,  was  Israel  chosen  of  Jehovah,  the  eternally 
existing  One — chosen  of  him  that  they  might  be 
a  peculiar  treasure  unto  him  above  all  people,  a 
kingdom  of  priests  and  an  holy  nation,  in  whom 
all  families  of  the  earth  were  to  be  blessed.  That 
is  an  idea  which  is  no  longer  "  tenable  in  our  days." 
They  stood  on  no  other  footing  than  their  neigh- 
bors. Their  religion  was  not  to  be  distinguished 
either  in  origin  or  in  character  from  those  of  the 
surrounding  nations.1  It  was  "nothing  less,  but 
also  nothing  more."  2  Nor  was  Jehovah  the  al- 
mighty maker  of  heaven  and  earth.  He  was  sim- 
ply a  local  god  with  strictly  circumscribed  tribal 
jurisdiction,  whose  worship  was  in  no  wise  incon- 
sistent with  a  belief  in  the  reality  of  other  deities, 
but  rather,  from  its  peculiar  limitations,  implied  a 
multiplicity  of  national  gods.  Mount  Sinai  was 
selected  as  the  scene  of  his  manifestation — not 
because  the  fact  was  so,  but  because  it  was  a  sort 
of  Oriental  Olympus,  the  sacred  mountain  of  the 
Semitic  peoples.3  The  religion  was,  in  short,  a 
thoroughly  idolatrous  cult,  having  in  its  primitive 
stages  a  close  affinity  with  bull  worship,  indications 
of  which  are  found  by  the  critics  in  Jeroboam's 
images  at  Bethel  and  Dan,  and  in  the  "  story  "  of 

1  Robertson  Smith,  "  Religion  of  the  Semites,"  p.  3  f. 

2  Kuenen,  "Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  5. 

3  Wellhausen,  "Proleg.,"  pp.  343,  439. 

71 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

Aaron's  golden  calf.  Kuenen  considers  it  proba- 
ble that  the  golden  bull  had,  up  to  the  days  of 
the  divided  kingdom,  always  remained  in  vogue 
as  a  symbol  of  Jahveh.1  The  ark  was  an  idol  at 
first,2  as  were  also  the  golden  calves  above  men- 
tioned, Gideon's  ephod  at  Ophra,  and  the  brazen 
serpent  which  Moses  set  up  in  the  desert.3 

In  one  important  particular  their  religion  was 
even  below  the  prevailing  level,  in  that  it  was  not 
indigenous.  According  to  the  critics,  the  Israel- 
ites were  inveterate  borrowers.  They  borrowed 
from  the  Assyrians  the  idea  of  the  winged  bull  as 
a  symbol  of  Deity  ;  they  borrowed  from  Babylonia 
the  Decalogue,  the  antediluvian  patriarchs,  and  the 
creation  and  flood  myths ; 4  they  borrowed  from 
Egypt  the  ark,  the  model  of  the  temple,  the  priestly 
vestments  and  the  Urim  and  Thummim  ; 5  they 
borrowed  from  the  Canaanites  their  sanctuaries 
and  sacred  tombs.  Indeed  the  only  things  which 
the  critics  would  not  allow  as  coming  under  that 
head  were  the  jewels  of  gold  and  silver  and  the 
raiment  which  they  borrowed  from  the  Egyptians 

1  Kuenen,  "The  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  346. 

2  Wellhausen,  "Proleg.,"  p.  189. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  283.  It  is  strange  that  while  the  pentateuchal  nar- 
rative is  myth  and  invention  when  it  is  urged  in  support  of  the 
biblical  theory,  it  suddenly  acquires  both  historicity  and  eviden- 
tial force  when  needed  for  critical  purposes. 

*  Delitzsch,  "Babel  and  Bible." 

5  Kuenen,  "Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  275. 

72 


THE    NEW    HISTORY 


on  their  escape  from  bondage.  That  would  be 
giving  credit  to  the  Exodus  narrative,  which  of 
course  would  never  do. 

On  this  plane  the  religious  history  of  Israel 
started,  and  on  this  plane  for  many  centuries  it 
continued.  As  before  stated,  the  Israelites  were 
polytheists,  or  at  best  monolaters ;  and  their 
prophets  were,  with  here  and  there  an  exception, 
troops  of  "drunken  dervishes,"  and  in  later  times, 
"miserable  fellows  who  ate  out  of  the  king's  hand 
and  were  treated  with  disdain  by  members  of  the 
leading  classes."  ■  When  during  the  course  of 
their  history  in  Canaan  they  followed  after  strange 
gods — Moloch,  the  Baalim,  and  other  Canaanitish 
deities — it  was  not  a  lapse  from  a  purer  faith 
supernaturally  revealed  at  their  very  birth  as  a 
people,  but  a  mere  excursion  into  outside  cults 
occupying  the  same  level  as  their  own — natural 
tributes  of  homage  to  the  gods  of  the  land  in  rec- 
ognition of  their  territorial  rights,  distinct  from 
but  not  necessarily  antagonistic  to  the  rights  of 
their  own  tribal  deity. 

This  condition  of  things  obtained,  without  change 
or  substantial  improvement,  until  the  days  of  the 
divided  monarchy  when,  in  the  eighth  century 
before  Christ,  the  earliest  of  the  writing  prophets, 
Amos  and  Hosea,  in  some  way  developed  higher 
"  conceptions  "  of  God — the  antecedent  stages  of 

1  Wellhausen,  p.  293. 

73 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 


which  "development,"  however,  are  nowhere 
stated  or  so  much  as  hinted  at.  But  even  this 
did  not  then  carry  with  it  the  conviction  of  the 
utter  nullity  of  idols  or  idol  worship  ;  that  point 
was  not  reached  until  the  later  times  of  Jeremiah 
and  the  Deutero-Isaiah.  These  higher  conceptions 
of  God — which  seem  to  the  common  mind  to  have 
been  in  no  sense  such  a  development  as  the  critics 
claim,  but  rather,  from  the  critical  standpoint,  an 
absolute  reversal  of  all  preconceived  ideas — finally 
culminated  in  the  "ethic  monotheism"  of  later 
Judaic  history,  which  became  thereafter  the  central 
article  of  their  creed. 

During  the  exile  the  Levitical  scribes,  out  of 
the  remnants  of  old  traditions  and  the  memories 
of  ancient  rites  and  pre-exilic  temple  usages,  com- 
piled and  elaborated  a  system  of  laws  to  meet  the 
exigencies  of  the  new  situation.  Into  this  code 
they  incorporated  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  dat- 
ing from  the  reign  of  Josiah,  and  on  the  return 
from  exile  in  the  days  of  Ezra  this  compilation,  at 
once  a  theology  and  a  ceremonial,  was  set  up  as 
the  original  charter  of  Israel,  in  the  minute  and 
punctilious  observance  of  which  their  religion  was 
thenceforward  to  consist.  Thus  the  codifiers, 
seeking  to  frame  a  norm  through  which  this  newly 
evolved  idea  of  the  divine  unity  might  be  expressed, 
achieved  an  unlooked-for  and  disastrous  result. 
They  killed  the  prophetic  impulse,   and  for  the 

74 


THE    NEW    HISTORY 


living  voice  of  God  speaking  through  the  prophets, 
substituted  the  iron  trammels  of  a  dead  law.1  So, 
as  the  event  proved,  the  prophets,  without  mean- 
ing it,  "  were  the  spiritual  destroyers  of  the  old 
Israel."  2  The  ultimate  outcome  was  rabbinism 
and  the  endless  puerilities  of  the  Talmudists. 

Yet  in  this  preposterous  muddle  of  human  pur- 
blindness  and  cross-purposes  and  topsyturvydom — 
as  complete  an  instance  of  hysteron-proteron  as 
could  well  be  imagined — we  are  invited  to  see  the 
working  of  a  divine  plan  and  the  preparation  for  a 
fuller  revelation  of  God  in  the  incarnation  of  our 
divine  Lord.  It  is  not  development ;  it  is  catas- 
trophism  in  its  most  violent  form. 

In  this  scheme,  if  such  an  incoherent  medley 
can  be  called  a  scheme,  we  have  progress  and 
retrogression,  elevation  and  degradation,  elabora- 
tion and  degeneration  alternating  with  bewildering 
inconsequence — anything  and  everything  rather 
than  the  measured  and  orderly  march  of  an  evo- 
lutionary process  by  the  operation  of  self-contained 
forces  from  a  lower  to  a  higher  level.  Doubtless 
it  requires  great  skill  and  dexterity  to  stand  an 
inverted  pyramid  upon  its  apex  and  hold  it  there 
even  for  a  brief  space.  The  permanent  stability 
of  such  a  structure  is  quite  another  question. 

1  Robertson,  "Early  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  37. 

2  Wellhausen,  "■Prolegomena,'"  p.  491. 


75 


VI 

THE   MUTILATED    BOOK 


It  is  difficult,  in  reviewing  the  charges  made  against  the 
sacred  record  and  its  authors,  to  avoid  the  impression  that 
the  critics,  instead  of  analyzing  the  facts  with  which  they 
profess  to  deal,  and  deducing  from  the  analysis  their  theo- 
ries, enter  upon  the  task  under  the  bias  of  foregone  con- 
clusions, to  which  the  facts  must  be  made  to  conform. 
Hence,  the  critical  exigency  and  necessity  of  a  reconstructed, 
or  rather  an  expurgated  Bible,  if  their  theories  are  to  have 
even  the  semblance  of  justification.  If  men  of  science 
were  to  frame  their  theories  after  this  fashion,  they  would 
become  a  laughing-stock  to  the  scientific  world.  And  the 
writer  is  persuaded  that  when  the  glamour  of  literary  renown, 
with  which  these  theories  have  been  emblazoned  before  a 
too  credulous  public,  shall  have  been  dispelled,  as  is  being 
done  by  a  riper  scholarship,  their  authors,  if  heard  of  at  all, 
will  occupy  a  very  humble  position  in  the  domain  of  biblical 
literature,  whether  of  the  Old  Testament  or  the  New. 

—Robert  Watts. 


VI 

THE    MUTILATED    BOOK 

And  it  came  to  pass  that  when  Jehudi  had  read  three  or 
four  leaves,  he  cut  it  with  a  penknife,  and  cast  it  into  the 
fire  that  was  on  the  hearth,  until  all  the  roll  was  consumed. 

— Jeremiah.  Jfc.VJ 

It  is  evident  that  a  scheme  of  history  such  as 
that  outlined  in  the  foregoing  chapter  calls  for  a 
vigorous  handling  of  the  documents  upon  which  it 
is  supposed  to  be  based.  It  is  certain  that,  taken 
at  their  face  value,  they  will  yield  no  such  result. 
Much  will  have  to  be  read  into  them,  more  stricken 
out.  While  the  critics  are  equal  to  either  demand, 
the  work  of  obliteration  seems  to  be  the  more  con- 
genial task.  In  fact,  their  achievements  are  reck- 
oned brilliant  or  commonplace,  in  exact  proportion 
to  their  destructive  ability.  With  such  a  standard 
of  success,  it  is  no  wonder  that,  like  some  modern 
surgeons,  they  are  vastly  more  concerned  about 
the  brilliancy  of  the  operation  than  the  welfare  of 
the  patient.  In  criticism,  if  not  in  forestry,  a  man 
is  famous  according  as  he  has  lifted  up  axes  against 
the  thick  trees. 

A  glance  at  the  results  will  show  that  no  com- 
plaint can  be  made  as  to  the  thoroughness  of  their 

79 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

appetite  and  capacity  for  biblicide.  The  book  of 
Genesis,  to  accept  their  estimate,  is  destroyed  ut- 
terly. After  they  have  done  with  it,  it  has  no  more 
historical  value  than  "Jack  and  the  Beanstalk." 
It  maybe  an  object  of  interest  to  the  antiquarian, 
or  a  cadaver  for  the  student  in  comparative  myth- 
ology to  dissect ;  but  when  common  veracity  goes, 
surely  all  claims  to  divine  origin  go  also,  and  there- 
with its  worth  to  the  ordinary  Christian  as  an 
authoritative  utterance  of  the  revealed  truth.  One 
critic,  it  is  true,  expatiates  with  great  unction  upon 
the  priceless  value  of  these  fictitious  patriarchal 
tales  as  themes  for  preaching,  and  their  undying 
power  on  the  heart,  imagination,  and  faith  of  men.1 
Much  useful  truth  is  inculcated,  and  many  sound 
morals  are  pointed  by  "^Esop's  Fables  "  ;  but  that 
fact  would  hardly  justify  their  inclusion  among 
the  bases  of  a  rational  faith  ;  nor  would  they 
thereby  commend  themselves  as  invaluable,  or 
even  justifiable,  subjects  for  homiletic  treatment. 
If  these  records  of  God's  dealings  with  the 
patriarchs — dealings  in  which  we,  according  to  the 
Apostle  Paul,  have  a  direct  and  vital  interest — are 
without  substantial  verity,  then  his  co-apostle  Peter 
is  wrong ;  we  have  not  the  more  sure  word  of 
prophecy,  and  we  have  followed  cunningly  devised 
fables.  It  is  consoling  to  know,  according  to 
this  critic,  that  we  can  without  loss  dispense  with 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  "  Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  pp.  108,  109. 
80 


THE    MUTILATED    BOOK 


history  at  the  terminus  a  quo  of  definite  revelation 
— i.  e.t  the  covenant  with  Abraham.  But  other 
critics  of  the  same  school  make  a  like  showing 
with  regard  to  its  terminus  ad  quern,  claiming  that 
we  are  as  little  assured  of  the  facts  in  the  life  of 
the  historic  Jesus,  as  we  are  of  the  existence  of 
the  legendary  Abraham.1  The  historicity  of  the 
intervening  stages  would  seem,  from  these  stand- 
points, to  be  of  little  moment. 

And  it  is  manifestly  so  accounted  by  them  ;  for 
Exodus  fares  little  better  at  their  hands  than  did 
Genesis.  The  man  Moses  existed,  and  probably 
lived  about  the  time  of  the  exodus,  if  there  was 
an  exodus ;  and  led  the  Israelites  out  of  Egypt,  if 
they  were  ever  there.  But  the  lawgiver  Moses  and 
the  laws  he  was  supposed  to  give,  are  myths. 
They  saw  the  light  centuries  later,  under  other 
skies  and  entirely  different  conditions.  The  legend 
attributing  the  Torah  to  Moses  arose  from  the  fact 
that  he  was  the  great  kadi  of  the  wilderness — 
the  natural  leader  and  magistrate  of  the  scanty 
and  unorganized  horde  of  Goshen  shepherds  whom 
he  had  led  out  of  Egypt,  and  of  the  Kenites, 
Amalekites,  and  other  Sinaitic  nomads  who  joined 
them  at  the  oasis  of  Kadesh-barnea.  Here  Moses 
sat  and  dispensed  justice  substantially  after  the 
fashion  recommended  by  his  father-in-law  Jethro, 

1  Julicher,  "  Introd.  to  N.  T."  Gardner,  "  Historic  View  of 
N.  T."     "Encycl.  Biblica,"  art.  "Gospels." 


81 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

and  narrated  in  Exod.  18.  And  it  was  these 
oral  decisions,  and  his  instructions  to  the  priest- 
hood, given  from  time  to  time  as  occasion  re- 
quired, which  constituted  the  only  laws  possessed 
by  the  Israelites  during  their  desert  sojourn.  To 
this  extent  only  can  Moses  be  regarded  as  the 
author  of  the  Torah.1  And  so,  while  such  por- 
tions of  the  narrative  as  square  with  the  critical 
reconstruction  may  be  accepted  as  fairly  trust- 
worthy historic  tradition,  the  legislative  portions  of 
the  book  must  be  wholly  rejected  as  a  source  from 
which  our  knowledge  of  Mosaism  can  be  derived.2 
Not  even  the  Decalogue  escapes  ; 3  it  being  assigned 
to  the  reign  of  Manasseh.4  The  "  fragments  that 
remain "  have  little  value  except,  as  occasion 
serves,  to  enforce  some  derogatory  point  made  by 
the  critics. 

Deuteronomy  is  fashioned  out  of  whole  cloth 
seven  hundred  years  after  its  purported  date,  and 
hidden  by  its  author  in  the  temple,  to  be  discovered 
and  sprung  upon  the  young  and  impressionable 
king  Josiah,  at  an  opportune  time  in  the  interests 
of  religion  and  reform.  This  was  done,  we  are 
informed,  by  "adherents  of  the  Mosaic  tendency."  3 

1  Wellhausen,  "  Hist,  of  Israel  and  Judah"  3d  ed.,  pp.  10  f. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  17,  18. 

3  Ibid.,  pp.  20,  21. 

*  " Proleg.,"  p.  486.  Pfleiderer,  "Development  of  Theol- 
ogy," p.  271. 

5  Kuenen,  "  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  19. 
82 


THE    MUTILATED    BOOK 


But  what  the  Mosaic  tendency  was,  on  the  critical 
hypothesis,  passes  the  wit  of  man  to  conjecture. 
The  Israelite  of  the  time  of  Moses  was  a  polytheist, 
as  he  himself  must  have  been,  unless  sadly  derelict 
in  duty  toward  his  followers.  As  to  whether  the 
"  opportunity  for  monotheism"  had  arisen  at  that 
early  date,  or  was  the  product  of  later  circum- 
stances, we  are  left  in  doubt.  Being  ignorant  of 
what  Mosaism  really  was,  it  is,  of  course,  impossi- 
ble to  know  whether  it  was  helped  or  hindered  by 
the  book  that  Hilkiah  found  ;  which,  by  the  way, 
was  only  the  kernel  of  Deuteronomy  as  we  have  it. 
It  needed  two  centuries  more  of  tinkering  to  bring 
it  to  its  completed  form. 

Leviticus,  with  such  of  the  narrative  portions  of 
the  other  books  as  are  needed  to  bolster  it  up,  is  a 
fraud  pure  and  simple ;  deliberately  fabricated,  as 
to  important  elements  of  it  without  shadow  of  evi- 
dential or  even  legendary  warrant,  more  than  a 
thousand  years  after  Moses  by  the  priestly  caste 
in  the  interests  of  their  own  order,  to  give  the  color 
of  Mosaic  origin  and  the  weight  of  divine  authority 
to  a  newly  concocted  code,  designed  to  secure  their 
own  supremacy,  and  to  enforce  by  its  sanctions  the 
burdens  and  exactions  which  they  purposed  to 
impose  upon  the  returned  exiles. 

The  so-called  historical  books  are  not  histories 
at  all,  but  books  of  devotion,1  whether  liturgical, 

1  Cornill,  "History  of  the  People  of  Israel,"  Eng.  tr.,  p.  9. 

83 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

or  merely  didactic  or  meditative  we  are  not  in- 
formed. Strangely  enough,  Wellhausen  admits 
that  they  contain  "  really  valuable  historical  notes." 
But  lest  we  should  be  exalted  above  measure  by 
this  unprecedented  critical  tribute  to  the  verity  of 
the  Scriptures,  we  are  gravely  cautioned  that  they 
are  "  largely  mixed  with  anecdotic  chaff  "  ;  needing, 
of  course,  the  sure  instinct  of  the  critic  to  tell  us 
which  is  which.  And  we  may  be  certain  that 
every  word  which  points  to  divine  inspiration  or 
intervention  will  be  unhesitatingly  referred  to  the 
latter  class. 

The  book  of  Psalms  is  the  hymnal  of  the  second 
temple ; 1  no  psalm,  our  Saviour's  ascription  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding,  being  of  undoubted 
Davidic  authorship,  or  belonging  to  the  Davidic 
age  ;  but  most  of  them  having  a  post-exilic,  or  even 
Maccabean  origin.  And  yet,  modern  as  the  Psalter 
is,  the  critics,  on  convenient  occasion,  can  discern 
in  it  elements  of  the  most  ancient  and  primitive 
conceptions  of  Semitic  heathenism.  As,  e.  g.y 
when  in  the  passage,  "He  shall  be  like  a  tree 
planted  by  the  rivers  of  water,  that  bringeth  forth 
his  fruit  in  his  season  "  (Ps.  I  :  3)  Robertson  Smith, 
finds  a  "touch  of  primitive  naturalism,"  having  its 
origin  in  the  superstitions  of  the  early  Semites 
which  located  the  sanctuaries  of  the  Baalim  in 
fertile  valleys  and  by  deep  watercourses  ;  or,  again, 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  "  Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  p.  87. 
84 


THE    MUTILATED    BOOK 


when  he  connects  the  verse,  "  The  sparrow  hath 
found  an  house,  and  the  swallow  a  nest  for  herself, 
even  thine  altars,  O  Lord  of  hosts  "  (Ps.  84  :  3) 
with  the  barbaric  taboo  which  protected  birds  from 
molestation  in  the  sacred  groves  of  the  local  gods.1 
Thus,  it  becomes  ancient  or  modern  according  to 
the  needs  of  the  moment ;  early  when  a  word  can 
be  found  which  can  be  distorted  into  a  recognition 
of  heathenish  rites  or  beliefs,  late  when  exalted 
spiritual  conceptions  of  God  are  involved. 

As  to  the  writing  prophets — for  we  are  to  dis- 
tinguish between  them  and  Wellhausen's  "drunken 
dervishes  "  and  "  miserable  fellows  " — their  so- 
called  works  consist,  to  a  quite  considerable  extent, 
of  collections  of  anonymous  oracles,  sheltered  un- 
der the  aegis  of  well-known  names  to  give  them  an 
authority  which  they  would  not  otherwise  possess. 
It  is  gratifying,  however,  to  be  certified  that  while 
modern  criticism  "has  already  removed  from  many 
of  the  prophets  large  portions  of  the  books  which 
bear  their  names  "  and  a  more  thorough  analysis  of 
these  books  may  "  issue  in  further  subtractions  of 
the  same  kind,"  yet  the  constructive  character  of 
the  process  in  question  may  be  fearlessly  asserted.2 
One  might  wonder  to  what  practical  use  the  pro- 
phetic books  could  be  put  were  it  not  that  the 
same  writer  enlightens  us.      "  We  now  perceive 

1  Robertson  Smith,  "Religion  of  the  Semites,"  pp.  104,  160. 

2  Smith,  Op.  cit.,  p.  217. 

85 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

that  their  real  value  consisted  in  the  indispensable 
preparation  they  provided  "  for  eighteenth  and  nine- 
teenth century  criticism  ! !  Which  is  rather  a  novel 
conception  of  the  function  of  prophecy. 

The  book  of  Daniel,  instead  of  being  the  in- 
spired utterances  of  the  great  seer  of  the  exile,  is 
a  religious  novel  of  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiph- 
anes,  written,  "  we  know  the  very  day,  almost,"  in 
the  month  of  January,  164,  b.  c.,2  and  falsely 
attributed  to  a  man  three  hundred  years  dead,  if 
he  ever  existed,  but  none  the  worse  on  that  ac- 
count.3 And  so  on  through  all  the  dreary  cata- 
logue. With  few  exceptions,  no  book  in  its  final 
shape  is  written  by  the  author  whose  name  it 
bears  ;  no  historical  statement  is  contemporaneous 
or  indeed  belongs  at  all  to  the  period  to  which  it 
refers,  but  the  whole  is  an  amorphous  jumble  of 
documents,  compiled  and  recompiled,  edited  and 
re-edited,  altered  and  transposed,  mutilated  and 
interpolated,  diminished  and  supplemented  by  one 
and  another  manipulator  to  meet  the  exigencies  of 
the  particular  scheme  he  has  in  hand,  or  to  hearten 
and  encourage  the  people  in  some  emergency  which 

1  Smith,  Op.  cit.y  p.  251. 

2  Cornill,  "  Prophets  of  Israel,"  Eng.  tr.,  p.  177.  It  is  to  be 
presumed  that,  the  necessity  existing,  criticism  would  be  equal  to 
the  further  task  of  deciding  what  kind  of  a  day  it  was  and  what 
influence  the  prevailing  meteorological  conditions  had  upon  the 
psychology  of  the  book,  a  result  which  would  be  just  as  worthy  of 
credit  as  the  one  reached,  as  above  indicated  by  Professor  Cornill. 

3  Dean  Farrar  :   "The  Book  of  Daniel." 

86 


THE    MUTILATED    BOOK 


has  arisen,  or  some  trial  or  peril  through  which 
they  are  passing.  And  these  are  the  foundations 
on  which  the  Christian  edifice  is  erected. 

It  is  probably  suggested  at  this  point  that  the 
extreme  features  of  the  above  summary  can  only 
be  fairly  chargeable  against  those  terrible  German 
radicals,  and  that  no  such  hostile  attitude  charac- 
terizes the  work  of  the  moderate  and  cautious 
critics  of  the  English  school.  Even  if  that  were 
so,  which  is  by  no  means  clear,  it  is  well  that  we 
should  remind  ourselves  that  the  higher  criticism 
is  a  progressive,  not  to  say  evolutionary,  science, 
and  that  its  appetite  for  destruction  grows  by  what 
it  feeds  on.  The  conservative  of  yesterday  de- 
velops into  the  moderate  of  to-day ;  the  moderate 
of  to-day  carries  within  him  the  "promise  and 
potency"  of  the  radical  of  to-morrow,  and  what  the 
full  fruitage  of  the  process  will  be,  time  alone  can 
disclose.  One  has  traveled  farther  than  the  other, 
maybe,  but  they  are  both  on  the  road,  and  vestigia 
nulla  retrorsum  is  the  badge  of  all  their  tribe.  It 
is  a  far  cry  from  Astruc  in  1753,  with  his  modest 
"  conjectures  "  as  to  the  documents  used  by  Moses 
in  his  composition  of  Genesis,  to  Kuenen,  Graf, 
and  Wellhausen,  with  their  dogmatic  rejection  of 
all  Mosaic  connection  with  pentateuchal  legislation. 
And  the  end  is  not  yet.  Indeed  one  step  forward 
has  already  been  taken  by  the  Frenchman, 
M.  Vernes,  who,  carrying  out  the  method  to  its 

87 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

logical  conclusion,  not  only  discredits  the  author 
Moses,  but  wipes  out  the  man  Moses,  as  well  as 
the  prophets  Samuel,  Elijah,  and  Elisha,  and  places 
the  origin  of  the  Old  Testament  writings,  law, 
prophets,  and  history  alike,  at  a  date  subsequent  to 
the  return  from  captivity  and  the  building  of  the 
second  temple.  At  this  rate  of  progress  another 
half-century  ought  to  see  the  whole  Abrahamic 
race  argued  out  of  history  and  classed  with 
"  anthropophagi  and  men  whose  heads  do  grow 
beneath  their  shoulders,"  and  such  like  creations 
of  poetic  fiction.  True  the  existence  of  the  mod- 
ern Jew  might  seem  to  present  obstacles  in  the 
way  of  such  a  result.  But  he  would  not.  It  would 
only  be  so  much  the  worse  for  him.  The  critic 
would  explain  him  away. 

Even  as  the  case  stands  to-day,  the  main  differ- 
ence between  the  German  radical  and  the  English 
moderate  is  one  of  manner  rather  than  of  matter. 
The  one  smashes  the  vessel  with  a  jeer,  the  other 
preserves  an  outward  show  of  respect  and  does 
his  breakages  more  gently.  The  one  brushes  the 
fragments  contemptuously  aside  as  an  encumbrance 
gotten  rid  of,  the  other  shows  great  anxiety  to 
save  the  pieces,  and  even  places  a  higher  esti- 
mate upon  the  shattered  potsherds  than  upon  the 
unbroken  pitcher. 

The  supercilious  boast  is  made  that  modern 
criticism  has  won  its  war  against  the  traditional 

88 


THE    MUTILATED    BOOK 


theories  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  it  only 
remains  to  fix  the  amount  of  the  indemnity.  This, 
rendered  into  plain  English,  means  that  criticism 
has  been  successful  in  its  assault  upon  the  Old 
Testament.  The  phrase  "traditional  theories  "  is 
pure  surplusage,  and  is  a  typical  instance  of  the 
favorite  critical  device  of  creating  a  prejudice 
against  opposing  views  by  the  dexterous  use  of  an 
injurious  and  unwarranted  phrase.  With  just  as 
much  propriety  might  one  talk  of  the  "  traditional 
theory"  of  Bancroft's  "History  of  the  United 
States,"  or  of  Motley's  "  Rise  of  the  Dutch  Re- 
public," meaning  thereby  that  the  reader,  in  good 
faith,  accepted  those  works  for  what,  in  like  good 
faith,  they  purported  to  be. 

If,  however,  the  boast  is  well  founded,  one  con- 
sideration is  urgently  commended  to  the  notice 
of  the  critics.  They  should  by  all  means  write, 
or  edit,  or  compile  a  new  Bible,  using  perhaps 
such  portions  of  the  old  documents  as  are  not  fatally 
discredited,  and  by  addition,  redaction,  and  exci- 
sion, giving  us  a  scientifically  developed  account, 
so  exact  in  its  chronology  and  its  statements  of 
fact  that  not  a  loophole  will  be  left  open  to  the 
attack  of  the  captious  and  the  skeptical. 

Assuming  that  the  new  views  are  to  prevail ; 
that  the  Christian  revelation  is  still  to  be  regarded 
as  having  its  roots  in  an  antecedent  history ;  and 
that  the  facts  of  that  history  are  to  be  accepted  as 

89 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

established  in  accordance  with  the  critical  recon- 
struction, the  necessity  of  such  a  book  is  hardly 
open  to  question.  It  would  be  well  also  if  at  the 
same  time  the  Old  Testament  could  be  withdrawn 
from  circulation,  or  at  least  decanonized.  Unless 
some  such  state  of  affairs  is  brought  about,  one  of 
two  things  will  happen.  Sooner  or  later  the  Chris- 
tian public  will  awake  to  the  real  nature  of  the 
issue — they  will  either  reject  the  critics  or  they  will 
reject  Christianity  ;  for  in  the  present  condition  of 
the  record  it  is  impossible  that  a  full  acceptance 
of  the  critical  position  and  an  unfeigned  belief  in 
revealed  religion  can  permanently  coexist. 


90 


VII 

THE   NATURE   OF   THE    EVIDENCE 


The  value  of  an  expert's  evidence  depends  not  merely  on 
his  exceptional  acquaintance  with  the  subject  which  he  has 
made  a  specialty,  but  also  on  his  capacity  of  concentrating 
attention  and  thought  upon  one  particular  element  in  an 
inquiry.  This  very  habit,  however,  makes  him  impatient 
when  others  insist  on  taking  a  wider  view  than  his  own  and 
giving  due  weight  to  considerations  of  a  kind  that  he  ignores. 
The  very  qualities,  therefore,  which  constitute  his  value 
as  a  witness  tend  to  unfit  him  for  the  position  of  a  judge. 
Hence  it  is  that  no  civilized  community  tolerates  a  tribunal 
of  experts.  _sir  Rooert  Anderson. 


The  soundness  of  this  principle  is  emphasized  by  every 
fresh  attempt  to  ignore  it.  Witness  the  recent  findings  of 
the  Board  of  Admirals  who  investigated  the  Dogger  Bank 
incident. 


VII 

THE    NATURE    OF    THE    EVIDENCE 

Let  them  bring  forth  their  witnesses,  that  they  may  be 
justified.  —Isaiah.  IfJ-'f. 

Now  the  question  arises  :  What  are  the  evi- 
dences adduced  in  support  of  the  amazing  conclu- 
sions involved  in  the  critical  theory  ?  On  an  issue 
so  vital,  where  so  much  that  the  Christian  holds  so 
sacred  is  at  stake,  the  testimony  ought  certainly  to 
be  of  the  first  class,  undeniably  competent,  of  a 
very  high  degree  of  probative  force,  capable  of 
withstanding  the  most  rigid  tests,  and  so  prepon- 
derating in  weight  as  to  admit  of  no  alternative 
solution  and  to  point  irresistibly  to  but  one  con- 
clusion. He  ought  not  to  be  asked,  nor  ought  he 
be  willing,  to  reverse  the  judgment  of  two  thou- 
sand years,  simply  upon  the  balancing  of  proba- 
bilities or  even  upon  the  presentation  of  difficul- 
ties and  apparent  discrepancies  in  minor  points 
where,  from  the  mere  lapse  of  time,  so  much  must 
of  necessity  be  left  in  impenetrable  obscurity.  He 
ought  not  to  confound  a  plausible  explanation  of 
a  difficulty  with  the  logical  demonstration  of  a 
fact.     Much  less  ought  he  to  admit  as  determining 

93 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

factors  in  the  problem,  surmise,  conjecture,  theory, 
opinion,  or,  indeed,  anything  short  of  actual  proof 
in  its  own  sphere  as  valid  as  that  which  he  would 
exact  as  to  the  title  of  a  plot  of  land,  or  the  facts 
upon  which  he  was  to  be  charged  with  a  pecuniary 
obligation. 

It  is,  perhaps,  contended  here  that  this  is  setting 
up  an  impossible  standard,  and  that  it  is  unreason- 
able in  an  inquiry  of  this  nature  to  expect  proof 
amounting  to  a  mathematical  demonstration,  or  even 
such  as  would  pass  current  as  legal  in  a  court  of 
justice.  That  is  to  say,  on  a  subject  of  the  most 
momentous  import  the  Christian  is  to  surrender 
his  faith  in  the  authority  of  God's  word,  and  to 
relinquish  the  brightest  hopes  ever  held  out  to 
poor  humanity,  for  reasons  of  a  lower  order  than 
those  required  to  prove  a  sum  in  arithmetic  or 
substantiate  the  ownership  of  a  bale  of  cotton.  To 
the  claim  that  it  was  the  best  that  the  nature  of  the 
case  permitted,  the  response  of  common  prudence 
would  be  :  "  Your  best  is  not  good  enough." 

For  when  we  inquire  as  to  the  degree  in  which 
the  considerations  advanced  by  the  critics  satisfy 
the  requirements  above  mentioned,  we  find  that  it 
is  only  by  a  loose  and  inexact  use  of  language  that 
many  of  them  can  be  called  proofs  at  all.  We  are 
told  that  no  external  evidence  worthy  of  credit  ex- 
ists, 1  although  the  indications  are  that  the  biblical 

1  Driver,  "Introd.,"  etc.,  loth  ed.,  p.  II. 
94 


THE    NATURE    OF    THE    EVIDENCE 


account  may  not  be  so  barren  of  external  support 
as  the  critics  would  have  us  believe,  strange  to 
them  as  the  assertion  may  seem  to  be.  The  same 
writer  informs  us  that  the  case  depends  entirely 
on  internal  evidence. 

The  phrase  is  an  imposing  one  :  it  has  a  com- 
fortably satisfying  ring  about  it,  and  it  seems  to 
import  the  ascertainment  of  facts  by  processes  so 
exact  as  to  leave  no  doubt  and  no  uncertainty 
about  the  result.  But  what  is  internal  evidence  ? 
It  is  one  branch  of  what  is  known  to  the  law  as 
expert  testimony.  Its  sphere  ostensibly  includes 
the  determination  of  the  date,  authorship,  com- 
position, purpose,  etc.,  of  documents  or  works  of 
literature  from  the  data  furnished  by  their  struc- 
ture, contents,  or  character.  It  really  amounts  to 
the  opinions,  or  what  might  often  be  more  appro- 
priately termed  the  guesses,  of  the  experts  on  the 
subject.  The  law  rightly  names  it  "  opinion  evi- 
dence," and  places  a  very  low  estimate  upon  its 
value.  It  is  only  within  a  comparatively  recent 
period  that  it  has  been  regarded  as  admissible  for 
any  purpose.  It  has  never  held  an  assured  posi- 
tion as  an  instrument  for  eliciting  truth.  In  the 
Tracy  Peerage  Case  in  the  English  House  of 
Lords  (10  Clark  and  Finnelly,  184),  where  there 
was  a  discussion  as  to  the  genuineness  of  certain 
ancient  documents,  Lord  Chancellor  Campbell,  in 
speaking  of  a  certain  titled  expert,  said  : 

95 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

I  dare  say  he  is  a  very  respectable  gentleman  and  did 
not  mean  to  give  any  evidence  that  was  not  true  ;  but  really 
this  confirms  the  opinion  I  have  entertained  that  hardly  any 
weight  is  to  be  given  to  the  evidence  of  what  are  called  sci- 
entific witnesses.  They  come  with  a  bias  on  their  minds  to 
support  the  cause  in  which  they  are  embarked. 

And  subsequent  legal  history  has  not  tended  to 
impair,  but  rather  to  confirm  and  strengthen  the 
views  of  this  high  judicial  authority.  Indeed,  the 
comments  of  modern  jurists  on  the  subject,  in  the 
actual  administration  of  the  law,  are  frequently 
couched  in  terms  less  calculated  to  save  the  feel- 
ings of  the  experts.  That  it  has  a  useful  place  of 
its  own  and  a  proper  sphere  is  not  to  be  denied  ;  but 
that  place  is  a  lower  one  and  that  sphere  much 
more  limited  than  the  critics  accord  to  its  opera- 
tion. Its  function  is  at  best  adminicular — L  e.,  in 
support,  explanation,  or  corroboration  of  other  ele- 
ments of  proof ;  and  when  it  is  elevated  from  that 
comparatively  lowly  office,  and  the  entire  burden  of 
a  case  is  sought  to  be  put  upon  it,  then  its  inherent 
weakness  becomes  at  once  manifest. 

Its  usefulness  in  any  event  is  precisely  condi- 
tioned upon  the  presence  of  certain  concurrent 
requisites.  Where,  for  instance,  knowledge  of  the 
language  concerned  is  exact  and  comprehensive ; 
where  a  large  outside  body  of  authentic  literature 
exists  to  serve  as  an  admitted  standard  of  com- 
parison ;  where  there  is  substantial  agreement  as 

96 


THE    NATURE    OF    THE    EVIDENCE 

to  the  antecedents  and  tendencies  of  the  period 
which  is  the  subject  of  inquiry,  and  where  the 
contemporary  history  is  fully  known,  resting  upon 
an  unimpeachable  foundation  of  established  facts, 
so  that  it  may  be  used  both  as  a  guide  and  a 
touchstone,  then  internal  evidence  may  with  profit 
be  resorted  to  in  the  absence  of  direct  extraneous 
proof  of  the  precise  point  in  hand,  and  it  may  re- 
solve difficulties  and  clear  up  obscurities,  and  may, 
perhaps,  with  a  greater  or  less  degree  of  proba- 
bility, furnish  grounds  for  passing  upon  disputed 
questions  of  authorship. 

At  its  best  estate,  however,  certainty  cannot  be 
predicated  of  its  results.  A  notable  instance  may 
be  found  in  the  discussion  which  raged  for  more 
than  a  century  over  the  authorship  of  the  Junius 
letters.  That  was  a  case  where,  if  ever,  the  proc- 
ess of  deduction  from  internal  evidence  ought  to 
be  capable  of  establishment  as  a  true  scientific 
method.  Every  condition  which  would  aid  in  fur- 
thering such  a  result  was  present.  The  text  of 
the  documents  was  beyond  question,  for  the 
original  manuscripts  were  at  the  service  of  the  ex- 
perts. The  investigation  commenced  contempora- 
neously, a  large  circle  participating  in  it,  while  the 
interest  it  excited  was  universal,  so  that  the  rele- 
vancy or  the  truth  of  every  scrap  of  evidence 
could  be  at  once  tested  by  common  knowledge. 
The  historical  and  personal  allusions  in  the  letters 
G  97 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

were  of  such  a  character  and  imported  such  inti- 
mate knowledge  in  certain  directions  as  to  confine 
the  scope  of  the  inquiry  within  a  small  compass. 
The  literary  style  of  the  author  possessed  such 
strongly  marked  characteristics  and  was  withal  of 
such  unusual  ability  and  distinction  as  fairly  to 
preclude  the  idea  that  this  was  his  only  essay  in 
literature,  thus,  in  effect,  further  narrowing  the 
limits  of  the  investigation.  The  indications  in  the 
letters  of  the  writer's  mental  and  moral  qualities 
were  numerous  and  illuminative.  In  short,  every 
conceivable  element  favorable  to  a  correct  solution 
of  the  problem — philological,  literary,  historical, 
and  personal — was  present  in  profuse  abundance. 
And  yet,  what  was  the  result  ?  Uncertainty  so 
complete  that  more  than  a  century  later  so  sound 
a  literary  critic  as  the  late  Abraham  Hayward 
writes  :  "  The  authorship  of  the  letters  remains  a 
mystery,  and  Stat  Nominis  Umbra  is  still  the 
befitting  motto  for  the  title  page." 

And  if  it  be  so  in  the  green  tree,  what  must  it 
be  in  the  dry  ?  Contrast  the  foregoing  with  the 
conditions  confronting  the  critics  in  their  attempted 
application  of  the  internal  evidences  furnished  by 
the  documents  constituting  the  sacred  record. 
The  language  itself  belongs  to  a  dead  and  buried 
past,  so  remote  that  its  idioms  and  usages  and  the 
meaning  of  many  of  its  phrases  are  largely  matter 
of  conjecture.     As  said  by  a  renowned  Orientalist, 

98 


THE    NATURE    OF    THE    EVIDENCE 


"  We  know  so  little  Hebrew  that  the  simplest  cor- 
rection of  a  biblical  text  is  a  hazardous  undertak- 
ing." l  Even  the  vocalization  of  its  words  was  for 
centuries  preserved  only  by  oral  tradition,2  while 
the  grammar  of  the  language  did  not  become  an 
object  of  study  until  the  ninth  century  of  our  era. 
There  is  no  other  extant  Hebrew  literature  of  the 
period  covered  by  the  biblical  record,  consequently 
no  outside  standard  of  comparison  ;  nor  is  there 
any  Israelitish  history  save  that  which  forms  a 
part  of  the  same  record.  There  are  therefore  no 
extraneous  facts  to  which  we  may  refer  either  as 
guide  or  touchstone.  Add  to  this  the  gulf  of  three 
thousand  years  which  yawns  between  the  critics 
and  their  quarry  ;  take  into  account  the  scanty 
and  inadequate  indications  which  survive  as  to  the 
social  and  economic  conditions,  the  habits,  the 
allusions,  the  daily  life  of  that  far-off  time;  then 
estimate  the  underlying  probability  of  reaching 
any  assured  result  in  an  attempt  not  only  to 
reconstruct  the  history  on  lines  radically  diver- 
gent from  the  prima  facie  showing  of  the  biblical 

1  Professor  Margoliouth. 

2  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  while  tradition  is  accepted  as  con- 
trolling in  the  matter  of  vowel  pointing,  no  weight  whatever  is 
allowed  to  it  on  any  other  subject.  To  be  consistent,  the  critics 
should  take  the  consonantal  skeletons  and  spell  out  the  vocaliza- 
tion for  themselves  de  novo — on  strictly  internal  evidence.  It  is 
an  exhibition  of  weakness  on  their  part  to  use  tradition  for  any 
purpose  whatever,  except  perhaps  as  the  derivation  of  an  oppro- 
brious epithet  to  throw  at  their  opponents. 

99 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

narrative,  but  also  to  separate  the  narrative  itself 
into  a  chaos  of  fragments,  identified  and  dated, 
written  centuries  apart  in  different  countries  by  an 
anonymous  host  of  authors,  compilers,  forgers, 
and  redactors.  The  fabled  "  cocksureness  of  Lord 
Macaulay  about  everything "  pales  into  insignifi- 
cance beside  the  quasi-omniscience  which  assumes 
such  an  achievement. 

Are  the  critics  dismayed  by  the  magnitude  of 
the  undertaking  or  embarrassed  by  the  scantiness 
of  the  materials  ?  Not  a  whit.  They  feel  them- 
selves fully  equal  to  the  task  ;  and  they  are  relieved 
by  the  paucity  of  the  evidence.  What  your  true 
critic  most  likes  is  a  free  field  and  no  facts.  Then 
he  can  produce  really  brilliant  critical  work,  ar- 
ranging his  facts  to  suit  his  theory  and  adducing 
his  theory  to  prove  his  facts. 

The  fallible  nature  of  this  kind  of  proof  is  exem- 
plified in  some  curious  results  of  the  critical  ex- 
amination of  the  internal  evidence  drawn  from  the 
books  of  Moses.  One  of  the  supposed  sources  of 
those  writings  is  the  so-called  priestly  code.  Some 
critics  of  the  school  most  in  favor  to-day  hold  it 
demonstrated  beyond  a  doubt  that  it  is  the  latest 
portion  of  the  Pentateuch,  composed  during  or 
since  the  exile,  more  than  a  thousand  years  after 
Moses.  Other  critics  of  equal  eminence,  applying 
the  same  apparatus  criticus  to  the  same  production, 
assert  with  just  as  much  positiveness  that  it  is  the 
ioo 


THE    NATURE    OF   THE    EVIDENCE 


oldest  part,  the  grundschrift,  or  foundation  writing 
of  the  whole.  A  document  which  at  the  same  time 
exhibits  marked  signs  of  extreme  age  and  equally 
marked  indications  of  comparative  youth,  must 
certainly  be  a  most  extraordinary  production. 

One  critic,  again  speaking  of  the  same  priestly 
code,  commenting  on  the  dry  formalism  of  its 
style  and  its  "  incredibly  matter-of-fact  statements," 
says  :  "  Everywhere  we  hear  the  voice  of  theory, 
rule,  judgment."  Its  legends  are  "dry  wood,  cut 
and  made  to  a  pattern  with  compass  and  square."  ' 
Another  critic  of  the  same  school  regards  the 
priestly  writer  as  a  gifted  poet,  who  in  his  "  vision 
of  creation  "  gives  us  the  opening  stanzas  of  a  great 
epic  of  humanity,  colossal  in  conception  and  pro- 
found in  insight.2 

One  critic  (Dillmann)  speaks  of  the  priestly 
writer's  style  as  "  juristically  precise  and  formal, 
its  language  somewhat  stiff  and  monotonous "  ; 
another  (Ewald)  dwells  on  its  "  peculiar  fresh,  poetic 
air,"  its  " perfection  and  beauty,"  its  "lucidity  and 
quiet  transparency,"  and  its  "  florid  style  of  de- 
scription," and  says  in  particular  that  the  epic 
strains  above  referred  to  "  may  serve  as  a  clear 
specimen  of  all  subsequent  ones."  3  It  is  prob- 
ably reserved  for  some  remote  future  generation  to 

1  Wellhausen,  "Proieg.,"  etc.,  p.  361. 
3  G.  A.  Smith,  "Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  p.  93. 
*  Sinker,  "Higher  Criticism,"  p.  43. 
101 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

discover  lyrics  and  pastorals  concealed  within  the 
pages  of  "  Abbott's  Legal  Forms  "  and  "  The  United 
States  Revised  Statutes." 

Instances  of  this  kind,  and  they  are  by  no  means 
rare,  give  point  to  the  remarks  of  Doctor  Wharton, 
the  great  legal  text  writer  : 

Not  only  do  they  give  us,  however  positive  may  be  their 
assertions,  probable  proof  as  distinguished  from  absolute 
demonstration,  but  when  we  weigh  their  testimony  we  find 
that  we  have  to  add  to  the  doubt  incident  to  all  probable 
proof  a  new  set  of  doubts  as  to  the  authority  of  the  several 
experts. 1 

Professor  Smith  " points  with  pride"  to  the 
fact  that  a  large  body  of  critics,  working  on  inde- 
pendent lines,  recognizes  the  existence  of  four  main 
sources  in  the  Pentateuch,  and  argues  therefrom 
the  scientific  character  of  the  conclusions  reached. 
But  Dillmann,  one  of  the  critics  cited,  names  three 
sources,  and  Strack,  another  German  critic  of 
eminence,  identifies  five ;  and  in  any  event  the 
consensus  of  opinion  is  only  as  to  their  number, 
while,  as  above  shown,  there  is  wide  divergence  as 
to  their  date,  origin,  and  significance ;  so  the  agree- 
ment is  not  so  intimate  as  to  be  startling. 

Even  in  a  narrower  circle,  where  unanimity  does 
exist,  many  will  attribute  it,  not  to  the  cause  as- 
signed by  him,  but  to  the  fact  that  the  critics  are 

1  Wharton  on  "Criminal  Evidence,"  Sec.  9. 
102 


THE    NATURE    OF    THE    EVIDENCE 


adepts  at  the  game  of  "  Follow  my  Leader." 
Professor  Von  Orelli  gives  a  much  more  probable 
explanation  of  the  phenomenon  than  does  Professor 
Smith.  In  his  introduction  to  Herr  Moller's 
recent  work,  "Are  the  Critics  Right?"  he  says  : 

Nothing  is  more  astonishing  to  me  than  the  readiness 
with  which  even  diligent  explorers  in  this  field  attach 
themselves  to  the  dominant  theory,  and  repeat  the  most 
rash  hypotheses  as  though  they  were  part  of  an  unques- 
tioned creed. 

If  they  plow  with  Samson's  heifer  the  unanim- 
ity of  the  answers  which  they  give  to  Samson's 
riddle,  while  it  may  be  gratifying  to  themselves,  is 
scarcely  surprising  to  others.  As  well  might  we  im- 
agine the  last  of  a  flock  of  sheep  claiming  as  a 
fact  that,  acting  on  independent  judgment,  the 
whole  of  the  flock  unanimously  chose  the  same 
gap  in  the  hedge  as  a  more  desirable  way  of  en- 
trance into  the  turnip  field  than  the  open  gate. 
Bell-wethers  are  not  confined  to  ovine  circles. 


103 


VIII 
INTERNAL   EVIDENCE 


It  stands  to  reason  that  any  process  which  professes  to 
take  to  pieces  the  mechanism  of  a  book  and  to  assign  its 
several  component  parts  to  totally  different  ages  must  be 
exceedingly  precarious  and  open  to  very  grave  suspicion. 
Any  one  who  should  attempt  to  do  the  same  for  the  great 
literary  monuments  of  Greece  and  Rome  would  find  but 
little  favor.  And  it  surely  must  be  evident  that  the  like 
process,  when  applied  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
cannot  be  less  precarious  or  uncertain  in  its  results. 

— Stanley  Leathes. 


VIII 

INTERNAL    EVIDENCE. 

They  are  their  own  witnesses. 

—Isaiah.  IjM.'f. 

That  the  evidence  relied  on  by  the  critics  is  of 
the  precarious  character  suggested  in  the  last 
chapter  is  abundantly  shown  by  the  history  of  the 
higher  criticism  during  the  last  hundred  years. 
One  hypothesis  has  arisen,  has  had  its  day  of  tri- 
umph and  has  fallen,  only  to  be  superseded  by 
another  and  another,  some  borrowing  features  of 
their  predecessors,  but  carrying  them  on  to  unim- 
agined  issues  ;  others  rejecting  most  that  had  gone 
before  and  striking  into  entirely  new  lines — the 
"document  theory,"  the  "fragmentary  theory," 
the  "  supplementary  theory,"  the  "  crystallization 
theory,"  the  "  development  theory,"  and  a  host  of 
others,  some  of  them  variants  of  earlier  ones  too 
erratic  to  range  themselves  under  a  descriptive 
title  and  therefore  known  by  no  name  save  that 
of  their  originator.  And  the  same  "internal 
evidence  "  stands  sponsor  for  them  all. 

What  can  be  said  of  the  soundness  of  a  line  of 
reasoning  which  readily  lends  itself  in  succession 
107 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

and  with  equal  apparent  conclusiveness  in  each 
case  to  such  a  jumble  of  incongruities  as  is  repre- 
sented in  the  foregoing  enumeration  ?  A  class  of 
proof  sufficiently  elastic  to  cover  and  "  conclu- 
sively demonstrate  "  them  all  is  surely  a  confirma- 
tion of  the  homely  adage,  "what  is  good  for 
everything  is  good  for  nothing." 

The  truth  is,  that  when  there  are  no  contempo- 
rary records  to  act  as  a  check,  and  no  possibility  of 
a  reference  to  extrinsic  facts  of  any  kind  as  a  test 
of  accuracy,  internal  evidence  has  been  made  to  do 
yeoman  service  in  support  of  all  manner  of  incon- 
sistent and  mutually  destructive  hypotheses  ;  but 
where  there  is  opportunity  to  measure  these  the- 
ories by  standards  of  known  fact,  the  result  has 
frequently  been  utter  failure.  An  instance  of  this 
latter  sort  is  given  by  Professor  Margoliouth,  of 
Oxford,  in  his  "  Lines  of  Defense  of  the  Biblical 
Revelation."  A  document  called  the  Cairene 
Ecclesiasticus  was  discovered  between  1896  and 
1900,  and  accepted  by  all  the  leading  Hebraists  as 
a  work  of  the  second  century  before  Christ,  the 
period  during  which  the  existing  Greek  and  Syriac 
translations  were  produced.  In  reality,  the  pro- 
fessor states,  it  is  shown  to  be  a  work  of  the  elev- 
enth century  a.  d.,  compiled  from  those  two 
translations,  and  he  concludes :  "  In  differing  about 
the  date  and  analysis  of  Hebrew  documents  from  a 
school  which  could  be  deceived  for  a  day  by  this 
108 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCE 


document,  and  could  spend  a  year  in  defending  it, 
I  do  not  seem  to  myself  to  be  incurring  any  seri- 
ous risk."  '  And  from  the  standpoint  of  common 
sense  the  professor's  confidence  would  seem  to  be 
justified. 

To  repeat,  the  determination,  say,  of  the  authen- 
ticity of  documents  on  internal  evidence  from  style, 
presence  of  time  indications,  etc.,  is  a  somewhat 
uncertain  process.  A  not  impossible  case  might 
be  put  which  would  make  even  a  higher  critic 
question  the  conclusiveness,  if  not  the  validity,  of 
such  evidence.  Let  us  suppose  a  testator  with  an 
unsuspected  liking  for  quaint  expressions.  He 
makes  a  holographic  will  devising  to  the  critic  a 
valuable  estate  in  "free  and  common  socage." 
There  is  no  proof  of  the  testator's  handwriting, 
and  the  attesting  witnesses  die  before  him,  leaving 
but  secondary  evidence  of  the  execution  of  the 
will.  That  happens  to  be  of  an  unsatisfactory 
character,  and  the  court  rules  the  critic  out  of  his 
inheritance  "on  internal  evidence,"  holding  that 
the  will  is  not  shown  to  be  a  contemporary  docu- 
ment, the  term  "free  and  common  socage"  hav- 
ing gone  out  of  use  since  the  early  years  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  But  the  response  is  :  "  That 
would  not  be  common  sense.  No  sane  judge 
would  put  such  a  decision  upon  such  a  ground." 
Precisely  so.     But  what  a  higher  critic  would  do, 

1  "  Lines  of  Defense,"  etc.,  p.  309. 
109 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

nay,  has  done  in  analogous  instances,  is  another 
question. 

A  friend  suggests  that  the  illustration  just  given 
is  not  in  point,  because,  first,  the  presence  of  an 
archaism  in  a  document  would  be  to  higher  critics 
no  proof  of  antiquity,  but  the  rather  that  it  was 
inserted  by  a  later  hand  for  purposes  of  decep- 
tion ;  and  secondly,  that  none  of  them  was  ever 
known  to  seek  an  earlier  date  for  a  document 
when  a  late  one  was  any  way  possible.  And 
there  may  be  force  in  these  suggestions.  Let  us 
take  an  illustration  to  which  there  can  be  no  such 
objection. 

In  the  works  of  a  great  English  author  are  to 
be  found  the  lines  : 

You  are  their  heir,  you  sit  upon  their  throne  ; 
The  blood  and  courage  that  renowned  them 
Runs  in  your  veins. 1 

According  to  the  critical  methods,  these  lines 
contain  strong  internal  evidence  that  they  were 
written  after  the  promulgation  by  Harvey  of  his 
discovery  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood.  And 
yet  they  were  published  when  the  latter  was  but 
a  youth,  before  he  had  made  the  choice  of  medi- 
cine as  a  profession,  while  his  celebrated  dis- 
covery was  not  made  known  until  the  poet  was  in 
his  tomb. 

1  "  King  Henry  V.,"  Act  I.,  Sc.  2. 
no 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCE 


Once  more,  in  the  works  of  the  same  writer 
these  lines  occur : 

The  strong  base  and  building  ot  my  love 
Is  as  the  very  center  of  the  earth, 
Drawing  all  things  to  it. l 

Internal  evidence  again,  of  the  very  strongest 
kind,  that  the  passage  was  subsequent  to  the  fall 
of  the  apple,  which  led  the  great  philosopher  to 
his  conception  of  the  modern  theory  of  gravita- 
tion, inasmuch  as  it  exactly  states  one  feature  of 
it.  But  Shakespeare  died  twenty-six  years  before 
Sir  Isaac  Newton  was  born,  and  nearly  a  century 
before  the  publication  of  his  immortal  "  Prin- 
cipia"  True,  the  movement  of  the  blood  in  some 
sort  may  have  been  known  in  a  vague  and  general 
way  before  Harvey,  as  also  the  effect  of  gravity 
before  Newton,  and  the  great  dramatist's  title  to 
his  seemingly  prophetic  utterances  is  secure.  But 
carry  the  incident  back  to  biblical  times.  Let 
Harvey  and  Newton  figure  as  priestly  scribes  of 
the  exile  and  Shakespeare  as  a  pre-exilic  prophet. 
Can  any  one  doubt  that  the  critics  would  have 
found  in  these  two  passages  confirmation  much 
stronger  than  holy  writ  either  that  Shakespeare  was 
post-exilic,  or  that  the  unscrupulous  redactor  had 
been  at  his  old  tricks  of  interpolation,  by  which  he 
projected  late  conceptions  into  earlier  times  ?   They 

"Troilus  and  Cressida,"  Act  IV.,  Sc.  2, 
III 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

would  be  wildly  wrong ;  but  must  it  not  be  admitted 
that  it  is  a  fair  replication  of  many  of  the  grounds 
upon  which  they  base  their  conclusions  ?  The  late 
Laurence  Sterne  once  observed  that  some  men  rise 
by  the  art  of  hanging  great  weights  upon  small 
wires.  If  the  science  of  the  higher  criticism  had 
existed  in  his  day,  one  would  surely  have  thought 
that  he  had  its  processes  and  results  in  mind ;  in- 
deed, a  plausible  case  might  be  made  out  that  the 
aphorism  quoted  contains  "internal  evidence"  that 
the  "science"  in  question  did  exist  and  was  referred 
to  by  the  humorist. 

The  minute  literary  analysis  to  which  every  page 
of  the  Old  Testament  has  been  subjected  by  such 
critics  as  Canon  Driver,  for  instance,  may  stand  in 
the  eyes  of  an  admiring  following  as  a  monument 
to  their  erudition  and  industry.  It  may  even  be, 
as  claimed  by  Professor  Smith,  one  of  the  most 
thorough  intellectual  processes  of  our  time,  and 
when  its  results  are  "done  in  colors,"  a  dazzling 
picturesqueness  may  be  added  to  its  other  excel- 
lencies. This  elaborate  treatment,  Professor  Sayce 
explains,  is  rendered  possible  by  the  limited  field 
in  which  the  analysts  work.  He  says  :  "  It  is  not 
difficult  to  learn  by  heart  every  word  and  gram- 
matical form  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  or  to  count 
the  number  of  instances  in  which  the  same  idioms 
and  phrases  occur." !    But  while  the  painful  minute- 

1  "Lex  Mosaica,"  p.  5. 

112 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCE 


ness  of  the  process  or  its  intellectuality,  if  you  will, 
is  apparent  enough,  what  of  its  probative  signifi- 
cance ?  Ancient  Hebrew,  Doctor  French  inti- 
mates, has  little  or  no  chronology,  nor  can  early 
and  late  be  with  safety  predicated  of  any  phrase, 
or  even  word,  that  is  not  post-exilic. *  Style  and 
contents,  therefore,  must  be  the  main  if  not  the 
only  reliance.  And  the  idea  that  with  these  only 
for  a  guide,  any  critic  or  any  number  of  critics,  by 
any  kind  of  microscopic  dissection  and  inter- 
comparison  of  writings  of  vast  antiquity,  in  a 
tongue  but  imperfectly  known,  can  determine 
their  authorship  with  such  nicety  as  to  assign  the 
beginning  of  a  verse  to  one  writer,  the  middle  to 
another,  and  the  end  to  a  third,2  and  can  identify 
the  second  of  two  contiguous  fragments  as  added 
ten  years  after  the  first,3  is  a  pretension  so  fatuous 
that  in  no  field  save  the  "  science  of  the  higher 
criticism  "  would  it  receive  a  moment's  considera- 
tion. A  level-headed  man  of  affairs  called  upon 
to  form  conclusions  as  to  any  question  affecting 
his  politics,  pocket,  or  pursuits  with  "  internal  evi- 
dence," similar  to  that  put  forward  by  the  critics,  as 
his  only  base  for  decision,  would  brush  the  tissue  of 
cobwebs  contemptuously  aside  as  something  too 
fantastic  for  a  grown  man  to  waste  his  time  over. 

1  Valpy  French,  in  "Lex  Mosaica"  p.  126. 

2  Sayce,  in  "Lex  Mosaica,"  p.  4  f. 

3  Sinker,  "  Higher  Criticism,"  p.  71. 

H  113 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

The  successful  accomplishment  of  such  a  feat 
as  the  critics  claim  to  have  achieved  would  tax  the 
powers  of  the  mystic  spectacles  by  which  the  Mor- 
mon prophet  deciphered  and  translated  the  "  re- 
formed Egyptian  "  inscriptions  on  the  gold  plates 
buried  by  the  angel  Moroni  on  the  hill  Cumorah. 

A  visitor  at  the  sanitarium  of  a  celebrated  alienist 
was  conducted  through  the  grounds  by  an  intelli- 
gent and  entertaining  guide,  who  discoursed  in  an 
interesting  manner  upon  the  various  phases  of 
insanity  as  illustrated  by  the  delusions  of  the 
patients  whom  he  pointed  out,  and  whose  peculiar- 
ities he  described.  In  the  course  of  his  conver- 
sation he  remarked,  referring  to  a  man  who  was 
stalking  gloomily  along  one  of  the  pathways  : 

"  There  is  one  of  the  strangest  cases  we  have. 
That  man  is  under  the  delusion  that  he  is  Alex- 
ander the  Great." 

"That  is  very  interesting,"  said  the  visitor. 

"  But  he  is  not  Alexander  the  Great,"  continued 
his  guide. 

"  Of  course  not !  "  was  the  natural  response. 

"  But  I  have  reasons  for  knowing  that  which  you 
cannot  possibly  have,"  he  persisted. 

"  Indeed,  and  how  can  that  be  ?" 

"  I,  sir,  am  Philip  of  Macedon." 

It  was  not  to  be  gainsaid  that  he,  if  any  one, 
ought  to  be  accepted  as  an  authority  on  the  subject 
of  the  identity  of  his  famous  son. 
114 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCE 


One  is  "  tempted  to  conjecture  "  that,  like  Philip 
of  Macedon,  the  critics  "  must  have  reasons  for 
knowing,  which  we  cannot  possibly  have."  Eso- 
teric sources  of  information  inaccessible  to  the  rest 
of  the  world  can  alone  account  for  the  telescopic 
and  microscopic  definiteness  with  which  they  parcel 
out,  date,  and  locate  the  component  particles — 
many  of  them  are  too  minute  to  be  called  parts — 
of  these  ancient  documents  down  to  the  last  jot 
and  tittle.  The  only  wonder  is  that  they  have  not 
discovered  and  supplied  the  names  of  the  several 
anonymi  "  on  internal  evidence." 

We  are  further  told  that  the  modern  criticism  of 
the  Old  Testament  is  based  on  the  presence  of 
" doublets"  or  duplicate  accounts  of  the  same 
events  in  the  historical  books  ; l  and  that  a  valid 
inference  of  separate  authorship  may  be  drawn 
from  differences  in  style  and  vocabulary  of  these 
two-fold  narratives.  The  professor  gives  an  in- 
stance. He  says  :  "  The  passages  which  use  Elo- 
him  speak  of  him  as  ereating  the  world,  and  talk  of 
the  beasts  of  the  earth  ;  the  passages  which  usually 
employ  the  name  Jahweh  speak  of  him  as  making 
ox  forming  the  world,  and  talk  of  the  beasts  of  the 
field"  l  Hence,  the  conclusion  that  the  two  ac- 
counts were  written  by  different  men,  as  it  is 
inconceivable  that  the  vocabulary  of  any  one  man 

1  G.  A.  Smith,  "Modern  Criticism,"  p.  33. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  35. 

"5 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

would  be  equal    to  the  strain   of    supplying  the 
recondite  synonyms  cited  ! 

It  is  an  odd  coincidence  that  the  treatise  from 
which  the  above  passage  is  quoted  contains  at 
least  one  instructive  example  of  the  "  doublets  " 
mentioned.  It  too  bears  all  the  critical  earmarks 
which  are  supposed  to  import  a  dual  authorship — 
both  statements  deal  with  the  same  subject-matter, 
one  speaks  in  the  plural  and  the  other  in  the  singu- 
lar number,  one  in  the  present  and  the  other  in 
the  past  tense  ;  the  words  used  differ,  the  form  and 
grammatical  construction  of  the  two  are  wholly 
unlike ;  in  the  first,  the  facts  are  stated  in  two  short 
sentences,  in  the  second,  the  entire  statement  is 
comprised  within  one  complex  sentence,  and  there 
are  even  indications  of  redactorial  additions,  as  well 
as  of  the  presence  of  the  two  main  "  sources." 

The  "doublet"  is  as  follows:  In  the  second 
lecture  on  "  The  Course  and  Character  of  Modern 
Criticism,"  we  read  :  "  We  may  say  that  Modern 
Criticism  has  won  its  war  against  the  Traditional 
Theories.  It  only  remains  to  fix  the  amount  of 
the  indemnity." 

In  the  third  lecture  on  "  The  Historical  Basis  in 
the  Old  Testament "  the  statement  is  :  "I  said 
that  the  battle  of  modern  criticism  with  the  tradi- 
tional theories  of  the  Old  Testament  had  been 
fought  and  won  ;  and  that  it  only  remains  to  discuss 
the  indemnity." 

116 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCE 


Now,  if  the  saying  of  the  same  thing  in  two 
different  ways  denotes  dual  authorship,  then  it  is 
plain '  that  these  two  accounts  are  by  different 
hands.  We  may  go  further  and  say  that  there  are 
strong  reasons  for  supposing  that  the  first  writer 
is  from  the  northern  and  the  second  from  the 
southern  kingdom.  The  indicia  are  too  marked 
to  be  deceptive.  The  racial  characteristics  of  the 
first  are  clearly  apparent.  The  caution  of  the 
Scot  and  his  liking  for  indirect  statements  are  seen 
in  the  avoidance  of  the  first  person  singular,  and 
the  use  of  the  phrase  "we  may  say"  ;  the  Celtic 
impulsiveness  which  leaps  hastily  to  a  conclusion 
manifests  itself  in  the  boast  that  the  whole  "  war  " 
is  over ;  the  capitalization  of  the  names  of  the  two 
contesting  principles  illustrates  the  Gaelic  passion 
for  prosopopeia ;  while  its  northern  origin  is  even 
more  strikingly  evinced  by  the  canniness  and  keen 
eye  for  the  main  chance,  betrayed  in  its  solicitude 
as  to  "fixing  the  amount"  of  the  indemnity. 

It  is  equally  clear  that  the  second  half  of  the 
doublet  saw  the  light  south  of  the  Tweed.  Com- 
pare its  blunt,  dogmatic  "  I  said  "  with  the  cautious 
"we  may  say"  of  its  predecessor;  note  the  com- 
paratively modest  term  "  battle"  used  by  the  mat- 
ter-of-fact Englishman  in  his  care  not  to  go  beyond 
the  record  in  his  claims,  and  also  the  lack  of  a 
direct  statement  as  to  who  is  the  victor  in  the  con- 
flict ;  and,'  finally,  the  elimination  of  the  commer- 

"7 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

cial  element  in  the  matter  of  the  indemnity,  he, 
no  doubt,  considering  it  more  consonant  with  the 
dignity  of  the  subject  to  "  discuss  "  it,  than  to  "  fix 
its  amount." 

One  is  "  tempted  to  conjecture  "  that  the  second 
account  originally  stood  "  a  battle  has  been  won  "  ; 
but  that  the  inevitable  redactor  seeing  an  apparent 
discrepancy  between  the  statements  of  the  north- 
ern and  the  southern  writers,  the  one  speaking  of 
a  war,  and  the  other  of  only  a  battle,  harmonizes 
things  by  the  substitution  of  the  definite,  in  place 
of  the  indefinite  article  ;  and  further  amplifies  the 
second  account  with  the  detail  "  fought  and,"  as 
well  as  the  explanatory  addition  "  of  the  Old 
Testament." 

To  the  question  why  he  confined  his  emenda- 
tions to  the  latter  document,  leaving  the  first  un- 
touched, the  answer  is  plain.  It  is  simply  a  way 
he  has.  The  redactor  never  acts  as  an  ordinary 
man  would  under  the  circumstances  ;  with  him  it 
is  always  the  unexpected  that  happens. 

This  doublet  by  no  means  stands  alone  ;  and  yet, 
"  internal  evidence"  to  the  contrary  notwithstand- 
ing, Professor  Smith  would  doubtless  resent  the  im- 
putation that  "  Modern  Criticism  and  the  Preaching 
of  the  Old  Testament  "  was  a  compilation. 


118 


IX 
THE   HISTORICAL   EVIDENCES 


The  modern  historians  have  refused  to  call  the  books  of 
the  Pentateuch  as  evidence  ;  they  have  eliminated  those 
■ '  summaries ' '  of  the  history  which  are  overlaid  on  the  his- 
torical books  and  we  have  accepted  them.  And  then,  when 
their  own  witnesses  step  into  the  box  and  are  expected  to 
bless  the  modern  theory,  they  curse  it  altogether.  And  this 
by  no  forced  cross-examination  on  the  part  of  those  who 
were  to  be  confuted  by  them,  but  by  spontaneous,  straight- 
forward statements  ;  and  forthwith  those  who  called  them 
proceed  to  tell  us  that  the  evidence  is  to  be  taken  with  res- 
ervation ;  for  later  additions  have  been  made  to  the  testi- 
mony, and  these  must  be  removed  before  we  can  get  the 
true  statement  of  the  case.  Nay,  these  prophets  themselves, 
even  when  we  get  at  their  own  words,  are  not  to  be  relied 
on  for  matters  of  fact  when  they  tell  us  that  other  teachers 
taught  the  same  truth  before  them  ;  nor  for  their  statements 
of  history  when  they  declare  that  their  nation  had  been 
taught  a  better  religion  and  had  declined  from  it.  Where 
is  the  fixed  point  and  firm  standard  by  which  we  are  to 
reach  the  truth  ?  The  historical  books  are  to  be  corrected 
by  the  aid  of  the  prophetical  ;  but  where  is  the  standard  for 
correcting  the  prophetical  books  ?  On  what  authority  are 
these  '  ■  insertions "  to  be  removed  ?  By  what  guide  are 
we  to  adjust  the  prophetic  misapprehensions  ?  The  only 
' '  fixed ' '  thing  perceivable  is  the  theory  itself ;  the  only 
standard  is  ' ' strike  out "  or  "I  consider. ' '  For  the  rest, 
what  may  be  called  by  admirers  a  delicate  process  of  criti- 
cism, may  appear  to  others  uncommonly  like  a  piece  of 
literary  thimble-rigging.  —James  Robertson. 


IX 

THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENCES 

They  have  made  void  thy  law. 

—Psalms.  llf'.Ut- 

But  we  are  told  by  Professor  Smith  that  the 
criticism  of  the  Old  Testament  is  mainly  histor- 
ical ;  and  that,  although  use  is  made  of  the  argu- 
ment from  language  and  style,  it  occupies  a  sub- 
ordinate and  comparatively  unimportant  position, 
being  "  only  corroboratory  of  a  conclusion  reached 
independently,  and  upon  the  evidence  of  the  sacred 
history  itself."  And  he  warmly  repels  the  charge 
that  modern  criticism  is  dependent  upon  the  pre- 
carious methods  of  literary  analysis,  claiming  to 
have  amply  demonstrated  that  the  main  conclusions 
of  the  critics  are  based  upon  historical  evidence 
derived  from  the  Old  Testament  itself. ' 

It  may  be  said  incidentally  that  this  is  a  strange 
assertion  in  view  of  the  contents  of  such  a  book 
as  Canon  Driver's  "  Introduction  to  the  Literature 
of  the  Old  Testament,"  which  seems  to  be  accepted 
by  the  prevailing  school  as  an  authoritative  epitome 
of  the  "assured  results  of  criticism."     That  book 

1  Smith,  Op.  cit.,  pp.  52,  56. 

121 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

in  the  main  consists  of  just  this  precarious  literary- 
analysis,  of  which  Professor  Smith  speaks  so  slight- 
ingly, and  to  which  he  attaches  so  little  weight. 
As  said  by  one  of  its  eulogists,  "  The  Presbyterian 
Quarterly,"  "  Every  phrase,  every  clause,  word  by 
word,  is  sifted  and  weighed,  and  its  place  in  the 
literary  organism  decided  upon."  Assuming  that 
the  philological  argument  is  the  negligible  factor 
that  Professor  Smith  makes  it  out  to  be,  what  was 
the  distinguished  Oxford  professor  doing  ?  Killing 
time  ?  Picking  black  oats  from  white  ones,  the 
device  by  which  inmates  of  English  penal  institu- 
tions used  to  be  saved  from  the  dire  consequences 
of  enforced  idleness  ?  Surely,  if  nothing  of  pri- 
mary importance  was  to  be  established  by  all  this 
exhaustive  dissection  and  analysis  he  has  labored 
in  vain,  and  spent  his  strength  for  naught. 

It  must  in  justice  be  said  that  Canon  Driver 
does  not  concur  with  Professor  Smith  in  his  ex- 
alted opinion  of  the  merits  of  historical  criticism  ; 
nor  does  he  share  his  views  as  to  the  uncertain 
character  of  literary  criticism.  He  says  in  the 
preface  to  his  "  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of 
the  Old  Testament,"  "  I  readily  allow  that  there 
are  some  critics  who  combine  with  their  literary 
criticism  of  the  Old  Testament  a  historical  criti- 
cism which  appears  to  me  to  be  unreasonable  and 
extreme." 

Which  view  is  the  ordinary  man  to  accept  ? 
122 


THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENCES 


Perhaps  both ;  and  to  agree  with  Canon  Driver  in 
his  estimate  of  the  unreasonable  and  extreme 
character  of  historical  criticism ;  and  with  Pro- 
fessor Smith  in  his  views  as  to  the  little  weight  to 
be  attached  to  results  reached  by  the  "  precarious 
methods  of  literary  analysis." 

But  we  should  not  take  Professor  Smith's  refer- 
ence to  the  argument  from  style  too  seriously.  In 
litigation  it  is  frequently  the  case  that  a  defendant, 
while  denying  that  he  is  properly  in  court,  or  that 
jurisdiction  has  been  acquired  over  him  or  over 
the  subject-matter  of  the  action,  yet  finds  it  desir- 
able to  contest  some  step  taken  by  the  opposing 
party.  His  counsel  therefore  appears  "  for  the 
purposes  of  this  motion  only,"  and  is  thus  enabled 
to  effect  his  immediate  object — opposition  to  some 
inconvenient  application — and  at  the  same  time 
prevent  his  appearance  from  subjecting  his  client 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court,  or  indeed  from 
having  any  binding  effect  outside  the  limits  of  that 
particular  motion.  One  is  "  tempted  to  conjecture " 
that  this  denial  of  dependence  upon  literary  analysis, 
in  answer  to  the  charges  of  the  conservatives,  is 
"for  the  purposes  of  the  motion  only"  ;  and  that, 
notwithstanding  this  disclaimer,  the  "  argument 
from  philology"  will,  when  occasion  serves,  be 
found  bearing  its  full  share  of  the  burden  of  the 
critical  case. l     In  fact,  the  very  lecture  from  which 

1  As,  e.g.,  Driver's  "Introduction,"  etc. 
123 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

the  above-mentioned  dictum  is  quoted  contains  a 
passage  wherein  Professor  Smith  gives  to  the  philo- 
logical evidence  a  significance  which  altogether 
overrides  and  renders  nugatory  the  historical  testi- 
mony.1 But  that  is  an  instance  in  which  the  latter 
tends  strongly  to  uphold  the  truth  of  the  biblical 
narrative ;  so,  probably,  the  critics  would  not  con- 
sider it  a  case  in  point. 

In  support  of  the  asserted  reliance  upon  the 
facts  of  Old  Testament  history  as  a  basis  for  the 
critical  conclusions,  we  are  cited  to  the  existence 
of  "doublets"  of  the  kind  referred  to  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter ;  one  from  Genesis,  others  from 
Joshua,  none  from  the  books  relating  to  the  period 
covered  by  Moses*  life  and  activity.  As  to  the 
"doublets  "  in  Genesis,  their  presence  is  in  nowise 
derogatory  to  the  claim  of  Mosaic  authorship  for 
the  Pentateuch.  The  fact  that,  as  to  an  earlier 
period,  he  used  ancient  records  as  the  groundwork 
of  his  narrative,  has,  to  the  ordinary  mind,  nothing 
whatever  to  do  with  the  authenticity  of  the  history 
and  legislation  comprised  within  his  own  time,  and 
with  which  he  had  an  intimate  personal  connec- 
tion. And  certainly  the  idea  that  duplicate  ac- 
counts of  what  happened  after  his  death  could 
have  any  bearing  upon  the  integrity  of  the  record 
of  his  own  life  is  one  which  could  occur  to  no  one 
save  a  higher  critic  or  a  resident  of  Bedlam. 

1  Smith,  Op.  cit.,  p.  63,  and  note. 
124 


THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENCES 


It  is  necessary  at  this  point  to  inquire  precisely 
what  is  meant  by  the  allegation  that  the  critical 
conclusions  are  based  upon  historical  facts  derived 
from  the  Old  Testament  itself,  confining  our  atten- 
tion for  the  moment  to  the  scriptural  narrative 
from  the  time  of  Samuel  onward,  at  which  time, 
according  to  the  critics  themselves,  "we  at  last 
enter  real  and  indubitable  history."1  Does  it 
mean  that  we  are  to  take  it  as  a  sufficiently  accu- 
rate, chronological  account  of  the  events  with 
which  it  deals,  entitled  therefore  to  credence  as 
sober  history  ?  Are  the  facts  therein  stated,  in 
their  entirety,  those  upon  which  the  critical  theory 
is  founded  ?     Not  by  any  manner  of  means. 

In  all  the  pre-exilic  narrative,  upon  the  critical 
hypothesis,  there  is  not  one  word  of  history,  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  term,  from  beginning  to  end. 
It  is  not  even  original  tradition.  Speaking  of  the 
books  of  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings,  Wellhausen 
says,  "  We  are  not  presented  with  tradition  purely 
in  its  original  condition  ;  already  it  is  overgrown 
with  later  accretions."  And  these  second-hand 
traditions,  with  independent  narratives  incorporated 
here,  and  offshoots  and  parasitic  growths  spring- 
ing up  there,  "have  finally  been  uniformly  covered 
with  an  alluvial  deposit  by  which  the  configuration 
of  the  surface  has  been  determined."2    Of  course, 

1  Smith,  Op.  cit.,  p.  77. 

2  Wellhausen,  "Proleg.,"  p.  228. 

125 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

before  this  amorphous  conglomerate  can  be  avail- 
able for  critical  purposes  this  "  alluvial  deposit " 
must  be  removed,  the  additions,  offshoots,  and 
parasites  separated  from  the  main  narrative,  and 
the  whole  sorted,  dated,  and  appraised,  such  por- 
tions as  fit  into  the  scheme  being  retained,  while 
the  residue  is  "  cast  as  rubbish  to  the  void." 

So  that  the  "  sacred  history  itself,"  upon  which 
Professor  Smith  claims  to  rely,  is  that  history  ex- 
cised, mutilated,  and  eviscerated,  turned  upside- 
down  and  inside-out,  and  robbed  of  every  vestige 
of  a  claim,  not  only  to  divine  authority,  but  to 
ordinary  everyday  human  credibility.  And  this  is 
the  inevitable  outcome  of  the  process  ;  for  it  must 
be  borne  in  mind  that  it  is  of  the  essence  of  the 
critical  position  that,  with  exceptions  unimportant 
so  far  as  the  early  religion  of  Israel  is  concerned, 
these  narratives  were  written  at  so  late  a  date  as 
to  deprive  them  of  any  possible  force  as  historical 
statements.  Naturally,  when  "  facts  "  are  manipu- 
lated after  the  fashion  indicated,  the  residuum  can 
be  made  to  prove  anything  and  everything. 

A  typical  example  of  this  method  of  handling 
the  facts  is  instanced,  and  its  true  character  ex- 
posed, by  Valpy  French,  in  "Lex  Mosaica."  It  is 
to  be  remembered  that  the  exigencies  of  the  theory 
imperatively  demand  that  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  as  the  precursor  of  the  temple  must 
be  regarded  as  the  invention  of  the  forgers  of  the 
126 


THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENCES 


priestly  code — an  afterthought ;  something  which 
never  had  any  real  existence.  The  Aaronic  priest- 
hood also,  with  its  hereditary  succession  in  the 
direct  line,  was,  from  the  same  necessity,  the  crea- 
tion of  later  ages,  Aaron  himself  being  a  fictitious 
person  who,  even  at  the  time  of  the  oldest  writ- 
ing, the  so-called  Jehovistic  narrative,  say  five 
hundred  years  after  Moses,  "  had  not  yet  made 
his  appearance."  l 

We  nevertheless  find  direct  evidence  of  the  es- 
tablishment of  this  tabernacle  at  Shiloh  in  the 
period  covered  by  the  book  of  Judges,  it  being 
there  spoken  of  as  the  "  house  of  the  Lord  at 
Shiloh  "  ;  which  is  in  turn  identified  with  the  "  tab- 
ernacle of  the  congregation"  and  "  the  temple  of 
Jehovah  "  in  the  first  book  of  Samuel,  at  which 
point,  according  to  Professor  Smith,  "we  at  last 
enter  real  and  indubitable  history."  It  is  spoken 
of  in  the  seventy-eighth  Psalm  as  "  the  tabernacle 
at  Shiloh,  the  tent  which  he  placed  among  men  "  ; 
and  the  critics  cannot  be  heard  to  deny  the  Davidic 
age  of  that  psalm,  in  view  of  the  use  they  them- 
selves make  of  the  argument  from  silence.  The 
prophet  Jeremiah  too,  whose  testimony  one  might 
suppose  even  the  critics  would  accept,  says,  speak- 
ing in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  "  My  place  which 
was  in  Shiloh  where  I  caused  my  name  to  dwell  at. 
the  first."    Surely,  if  any  fact  could  ever  be  estab- 

1  Wellhausen,  p.  354. 

127 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

lished  by  biblical  testimony,  this  fact  was.  But 
Doctor  French  shows  what  a  small  chance  for  life 
a  fact  has  when  it  stands  in  the  way  of  a  critical 
theory.  He  says,  "  The  critics  dispose  of  the  evi- 
dence. As  the  prototype  of  the  temple  of  Solomon, 
Shiloh  was  the  culminating  fraud  of  the  priestly 
code,  a  successful  afterthought ;  in  fact,  in  the  Judges 
'  there  is  no  mention  of  the  tabernacle.  It  has  not  yet 
appeared.'  Having  struck  it  out  of  the  text,  Well- 
hausen— surely  not  seriously— observes,  '  So  that  the 
principal  mark  of  the  priestly  code  is  wanting ' !  "  * 
One  of  the  references  to  the  tabernacle  in 
First  Samuel,  above  cited,  Wellhausen  finds  to  be 
"  badly  attested,  and  from  its  contents  open  to 
suspicion."  The  latter  clause  of  this  condemna- 
tion is  understandable,  for  the  passage  in  question 
is  decidedly  inimical  to  the  critical  theory,  and 
therefore  from  his  point  of  view  "  open  to  suspi- 
cion." It  is  "  badly  attested  "  because  it  does  not 
appear  in  the  Septuagint,  although,  strange  to  say, 
in  another  place  and  with  another  point  to  make, 
Wellhausen  draws  an  entirely  different  conclusion 
from  a  similar  state  of  facts,  deeming  it  probable 
that  "the  omissions  of  the  Septuagint  are  due  to 
an  attempt  to  remove  difficulties  which  has  not 
quite  attained  its  end."2     An  illuminative  exhibi- 

1  "Lex  Mosaica,"  p.  133  f. 

2  Robertson  Smith,    "Old   Testament    in    Jewish    Church," 
p.  431,  2d  ed. 

128 


THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENCES 


tion  of  the  scientific  exactness  and  unvarying  sta- 
bility of  the  rules  governing  "  the  most  thorough 
intellectual  process  of  the  age."  Why  the  unpur- 
posed omission  of  the  passage  in  question  is  not 
at  least  as  reasonable  an  hypothesis  as  its  inten- 
tional interpolation  into  the  Masoretic  text  is  not 
apparent.  It  is  "  open  to  suspicion  "  that  if  the 
passage  had  favored  the  critical  theory  its  absence 
from  the  Septuagint  would  have  formed  no  bar  in 
the  way  of  the  critics  founding  an  argument  upon 
it,  even  if  they  would  have  thought  it  worth  while 
to  mention  the  fact  of  its  omission.  In  a  footnote 
Doctor  French  says :  "  Mr.  Cave  rightly  suggests 
that  the  critics,  to  be  successful, will  have  to  relegate 
First  Samuel  to  the  days  of  Ezra."  l  He  need  be 
under  no  misapprehension  ;  when  the  necessity  is 
perceived  the  evidence  will  be  forthcoming. 

But  further,  in  this  same  book  of  Judges,  we 
find  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron, 
ministering  before  the  ark  of  the  covenant  (Judg. 
20:28).  "This,"  continues  Doctor  French,  "is 
not  a  welcome  passage  to  the  critics.  Wellhausen 
admits  that  it  'points  rather  to  the  priestly  code,' 
but  as  this  cannot  possibly  be  allowed,  he  deter- 
mined that  the  clause  is  a  gloss."  2  Doctor  French 
further  says  that  Kuenen  reluctantly  allows  it  to 
have  weight  as  testimony.     He  does  not  mention 

1  "Inspir.  of  the  Old  Testament,"  p.  269. 
a  "Lex  Mosaica"  p.  140. 

I  129 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

that,  before  doing  so,  the  latter  takes  care  to  rob 
it  of  all  possible  value  by  remarking :  "  It  is  yet  to 
be  determined  how  far  this  account  is  worthy  of 
credit."  l  Colenso  stigmatizes  it  as  an  interpola- 
tion which  "  has  manifestly  been  inserted  by  some 
priestly  writer  who  could  not  endure  that  the 
people  should  ask  counsel  of  Jehovah  except 
through  the  intervention  "of   an  Aaronic  priest.2 

These  instances  have  been  dwelt  on  in  some 
detail  merely  as  specimens  of  the  wanton  and 
reckless  manner  in  which  the  evidence  of  the 
"  sacred  history  itself  "  has  been  warped  and  dis- 
torted and  its  probative  value  assailed  by  the 
"  historical  criticism  "  upon  which  Professor  Smith 
lays  so  much  stress.  If  but  a  tithe  of  the  counts 
in  the  critical  impeachment  of  the  integrity  of  the 
holy  Scriptures  is  well  found,  then  they  are  value- 
less for  any  purpose.  No  sound  conclusion  of  any 
sort  can  be  based  upon  them. 

But  the  illogical  attitude  of  the  critics  in  this, 
as  in  other  matters,  is  well  shown  by  Professor 
Robertson  in  some  trenchant  comments  on  Stade's 
"  Geschichte  der  Volkes  Israel"  which  are  never- 
theless of  general  application  : 

A  remark  may  be  made  at  the  outset  [says  Professor 
Robertson]  on  the  peculiar  manipulation  of  the  "sources" 
in  his  argument.     Writers  of  Stade's  school  are  never  tired 

1  Kuenen,  "  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  315. 

1  Colenso,  "Lect.  on  the  Pent,"  p.  245. 
130 


THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENXES 


of  repeating  that  written  documents  give  us  certain  informa- 
tion only  in  regard  to  the  period  at  which  they  are  composed. 
They  declare  at  the  same  time  that  we  have  no  authentic 
written  documents  before  the  eighth  or  ninth  century  b.  c. 
These  documents,  therefore,  ought  only  to  be  taken  as  evi- 
dences of  the  religious  conceptions  of  that  period,  and  yet 
Stade  relies  on  them  for  proof  of  the  religious  beliefs  of 
Israel  at  the  time  of  and  even  long  before  the  time  of  Moses. 
This  he  does,  however,  only  when  he  finds  elements  giving 
countenance  to  his  own  theory,  for  the  moment  that  a  writer 
of  this  period  gives  his  testimony  to  the  biblical  theory  his 
evidence  is  discredited  as  a  modern  reading  of  old  facts,  or 
even  a  later  interpolation  of  a  redactor.  To  such  straits  are 
writers  of  this  school  reduced  that  they  have  to  employ  dis- 
credited works  to  build  up  their  own  theory.1 

Well  may  so  renowned  a  critic  as  Dillmann,  by 
many  esteemed  the  ablest  and  most  learned  leader 
of  the  German  critical  movement,2  say  of  Robert- 
son that  "he  hits  the  nail  on  the  head."  For  if 
the  passage  just  quoted  is  not  an  exact  and  ex- 
haustive characterization  of  the  critical  modus 
operandi  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  one  in  all  the 
literature  of  the  subject. 

Perhaps  the  full  beauty  of  the  method  can  be 
best  illustrated  by  translating  it  in  terms  of  actual 
present-day  life.  An  action  is  brought  in  one  of 
our  courts  to  which  the  critic  is  a  party.  On  the 
trial  he  first  undertakes,  elaborately  and  effectually, 
to  impeach  the  credibility  of  the  main,  indeed  the 

1  Robertson,  "  Early  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  228  f. 

2  Wace,  "  Bible  and  Modern  Investigation,"  p.  45. 

131 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 


only,  witness  in  the  case,  and  then  proceeds  to  sup- 
port his  own  contentions  by  such  shreds  and 
patches  of  this  discredited  testimony  as  tell  in  his 
favor,  rejecting  the  remainder  as  unworthy  of 
belief  or  even  consideration. 

It  is  needless  to  say  what  would  be  the  outcome 
of  such  a  litigation. 

Or,  to  vary  the  illustration,  let  us  suppose  a 
counsel  learned  in  the  law  addressing  the  court 
somewhat  after  this  fashion  : 

May  it  please  the  court  :  We  desire  to  offer  in  evidence 
some  records  on  which  we  propose  to  rest  our  case,  but 
before  so  doing  we  would  ask  the  attention  of  the  court  to 
some  preliminary  explanations  as  to  our  line  of  proof. 

These  records  are  of  varying  degrees  of  authenticity. 
Few  of  them,  it  may  be  at  once  admitted,  were  written  by 
their  reputed  authors  or  were  in  existence  at  the  time  of 
their  alleged  date.  Even  those  whose  authenticity  is  con- 
ceded have  been  from  time  to  time  subjected  to  alteration 
and  addition,  excision  and  revision  by  successive  editors 
of  differing  tendencies  to  suit  the  purposes  of  their  sev- 
eral schemes.  Some  of  the  more  important  ones,  which 
purport  in  large  part  to  be  contemporaneous  records  and 
which  seem  to  set  out  a  circumstantial  and  connected  state 
of  facts,  apparently  chronological  and  orderly  in  form,  are 
nevertheless  late  compilations  of  different  documents  pro- 
duced centuries  apart,  and  finally  brought  together  and 
consolidated  into  one  instrument  more  than  a  thousand 
years  afterwards.  Nor  are  they  to  be  taken  as  evidence  of 
the  facts  therein  alleged,  according  to  their  prima  facie 
showing.  On  the  contrary,  paradoxical  as  it  may  seem, 
events  therein  recorded  and  relied  upon  as  fact  by  the  other 
132 


THE    HISTORICAL    EVIDENXES 


side  we  shall  prove  never  to  have  occurred,  and  yet  to  be 
sufficiently  existent  to  be  adduced  in  support  of  our  conten- 
tions. As,  to  cite  an  instance,  the  brazen  serpent  set  up  by 
Moses  in  the  wilderness.  This,  we  shall  claim  never  ex- 
isted, and  yet  we  may  find  it  desirable  to  bring  it  forward 
as  evidence  of  the  idolatrous  beliefs  and  practices  of  the 
Israelites  of  the  Mosaic  age.1 

It  will  doubtless  appear  to  the  court  that  with  the  record 
in  this  condition  no  certain  conclusions  of  any  kind  can  be 
drawn.  But  we  think  that  from  the  theory  we  have  evolved 
as  to  the  course  which  events  must  have  taken  during  the 
period  covered  by  our  inquiry,  and  from  our  careful  exami- 
nation and  analysis  of  the  documents  in  question,  and  our 
deductions  as  to  the  spuriousness,  and  our  consequent 
elimination  therefrom,  of  the  elements  which  conflict  with 
this  theory,  we  shall  be  able  to  present  an  intelligible, 
coherent,  and  harmonious  state  of  facts  ' '  derived  from  the 
sacred  history  itself,"  which  will  commend  itself  to  the 
favorable  consideration  of  the  court,  to  whose  judgment  we 
confidently  submit  our  case. 

Would  he  be  allowed  to  get  to  the  end  of  his 
screed  ?  Can  it  be  for  a  moment  conceived  that  any 
one  other  than  a  born  fool  would  have  the  temerity 
to  go  into  court  on  such  an  errand  and  with  such 
a  plea  ? 

It  will  probably  be  objected  that  it  is  absurd 
to  suppose  that  a  philosophical  inquiry  of  the 
nature  and  scope  of  the  one  under  consideration 
could  possibly  be  confined  within  the  rigid  limits 
of  and  be  conducted  in  compliance  with  the  tech- 

1  Wellhausen,  "Proleg.,"  p.  283. 
*33 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

nical  formalities  usual  in  a  legal  proceeding.  And 
perhaps  that  is  so.  But  it  may  be  said  that,  not- 
withstanding the  shallow  satire  expended  upon  the 
"red  tape"  and  formalism  of  the  law,  if  the  inves- 
tigation and  discussion  of  the  questions  involved 
in  this  controversy  could  by  any  means  be  made 
even  to  approximate  the  orderliness  and  impar- 
tiality with  which  legal  inquiries  are  conducted, 
with  legal  forms  observed  and  legal  rules  govern- 
ing the  relevancy  and  competence  of  testimony 
enforced,  and  legal  requirements  as  to  the  burden 
of  proof  and  the  weight  of  evidence  insisted  on,  the 
process  would  attain  a  sanity  and  a  sobriety  which 
it  has  not  hitherto  exhibited  and  its  conclusions 
would  command  a  general  respect  immeasurably 
greater  than  has  yet  been  accorded  to  them. 


i34 


X 

THE   UNEQUAL   BALANCES 


Passages  were  quoted  from  Amos  and  Hosea  as  imply- 
ing an  acquaintance  with  the  priestly  code,  but  they  were 
not  such  as  could  make  any  impression  on  those  who  were 
already  persuaded  that  the  latter  was  the  more  recent. 

— /.   Wellhausen. 


The  modern  theory  is  strong  in  minute  analysis,  but  weak 
in  face  of  controlling  facts.  It  will  laboriously  strain  out  a 
gnat  in  the  critical  process  of  determining  the  respective 
authors  of  a  complex  passage  ;  but  when  it  comes  to  a  real 
difficulty  in  history,  it  boldly  swallows  the  camel  and  wipes 
its  mouth,  saying,  "I  have  eaten  nothing." 

— James  Robertson. 


X 

THE   UNEQUAL   BALANCES 

Thou  shalt  not  have  in  thy  bag  divers  weights,  a  great 
and  a  small.  — Deuterono7ny.  X$': /J, 

This  mutilation  of  the  record  and  manipulation 
of  the  facts  are  not  the  only  features  of  the  crit- 
ical programme  to  which  a  fair-minded  man  would 
naturally  take  vigorous  exception.  He  complains, 
and  has  a  right  to  complain,  that  the  scales  are  not 
held  true,  even  with  respect  to  the  scanty  mate- 
rials which  the  critics  have  left  unchallenged  as  a 
valid  basis  for  decision,  and  to  the  necessary  con- 
clusions deducible  therefrom. 

Arguments  which  are  accepted  as  irresistibly 
cogent  when  used  for  weapons  of  attack,  somehow 
seem  to  lose  all  their  force  when  employed  for  pur- 
poses of  defense.  A  rule  is  laid  down  and  rigor- 
ously applied — pushed  even  to  extreme  limits — 
where  an  injurious  inference  is  possible  ;  but  when 
a  like  rule  is  invoked  which  tends  in  the  opposite 
direction,  either  it  is  ignored  altogether,  or  airily 
avoided  as  without  significance  ;  or  else  a  dexter- 
ously vague  admission  is  made  for  purposes  of 
rejoinder  only,  to  be  subsequently  deprived  of 
i37 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

all  effect  when  the  general  question  comes  to  be 
affirmatively  considered. 

For  instance,  in  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes  there 
is  a  passage  :  "  A  bird  of  the  air  shall  carry  the 
voice,  and  that  which  hath  wings  shall  tell  the 
matter."  This,  we  are  told,  is  a  manifest  allusion 
to  the  cranes  of  Ibycus  ; !  although  the  certainty 
of  the  allusion  is  by  no  means  as  manifest  to  the 
ordinary  reader  as  it  was  to  Professor  Momerie,  the 
reference  apparently  pointing  just  as  strongly  to 
the  modern  device  of  using  carrier  pigeons  as  mes- 
sengers. It  was,  however,  plain  to  him,  and  the 
inference  he  draws  is  that  the  book  could  not  have 
been  written  before  the  rise  of  the  Greek  legend 
in  the  fifth  century.  And  many  critical  conclu- 
sions as  to  the  late  date  of  documents  are  founded 
on  just  such  inferences. 

But  although  it  is  pointed  out  that  the  books  of 
the  prophets  are  steeped  and  saturated  in  the  lan- 
guage of,  and  throughout  presuppose  the  institu- 
tions embodied  in  the  law,  which,  from  the  necessi- 
ties of  their  theory,  did  not  see  the  light  for  cen- 
turies thereafter,  the  works  of  the  critics  will  be 
searched  in  vain  to  find  a  frank  acknowledgment 
of  the  fact,  or  any  admission  that  they  raise  a 
somewhat  formidable  question. 

These  references  are  neither  scanty  nor  ambigu- 
ous ;  on  the  contrary,  they  are  abundant,  precise, 

1  Momerie,  "Agnosticism,"  p.  170. 

138 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANCES 


and  comprehensive.  In  his  valuable  work,  "  The 
Law  in  the  Prophets,"  Prof.  Stanley  Leathes  has 
collated  the  passages  in  question,  and  they  are 
found  to  comprise  the  repetition  of  significant  and 
distinctive  phrases  used  in  the  several  books  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  nowhere  else ;  plain  and  unmis- 
takable references  to  historical  incidents  recorded 
there,  and  nowhere  else  ;  exact  quotations  of  whole 
sentences  of  substantial  import  found  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch, and  nowhere  else  ;  and  profuse,  clear,  and 
definite  allusions  to  sacrificial  and  ritual  language, 
feasts,  and  institutions,  inhibitions,  statutory  enact- 
ments, and  social  regulations  set  out  and  prescribed 
in  the  Pentateuch,  and  nowhere  else} 

Now,  it  would  seem  that  all  this  wealth  of  cumu- 
lative testimony  presents  an  impregnable  case  for 
the  priority  of  the  written  law.  In  any  other  field 
of  investigation,  a  position  supported  by  such  a 
chain  of  evidence  would  be  deemed  to  be  estab- 
lished beyond  a  peradventure.  And  indeed,  here, 
if  the  question  were  the  other  way  about,  and 
the  exigencies  of  the  critical  case  demanded  that 
the  law  should  precede  the  prophets,  it  would  not 
be  difficult   to  imagine   the  contemptuous   scorn 

1  A  compendious  and  judicious  selection  of  some  of  the  more 
important  passages  from  the  prophetic  and  historical  books,  with 
corresponding  references  to  the  Pentateuch  may  be  found  in  Dr. 
A.  J.  Rowland's  useful  manual,  "The  Pentateuch,"  at  pages 
22-24.  Cf.  also  the  weighty  considerations  on  this  head  ad- 
vanced by  Keil  in  his  "Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament" 
(Eng.  tr.),  Vol.  I.,  pp.  165-174. 

139 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

with  which  the  critics  would  overwhelm  any  one 
who  dared  deny  or  minimize  the  convincing  force 
and  effect  of  the  concurrent  lines  of  proof  above 
enumerated. 

On  analogous  grounds,  slighter,  however,  in  many 
cases,  they  have  decided  that  the  later  prophets 
were  close  students  of  and  intimately  acquainted 
with  the  writings  of  their  predecessors,  of  which 
they  made  free  use,  incorporating  them  in  their 
own  utterances  without  acknowledgment.  Indeed, 
for  reasons  not  hard  to  understand,  they  are  astute 
to  find  evidence  of  positive  quotations  in  mere 
general  similarity  of  statement,  fairly  referable  to 
identity  of  subject-matter  and  standpoint. 

But  these  reiterated  testimonies  of  the  prophets 
to  the  pre-existence  of  the  Mosaic  law,  touching 
as  they  do,  directly  or  indirectly,  almost  every  im- 
portant element,  and  referring  to  every  book  of  the 
Pentateuch  with  sufficient  particularity  to  give 
point  and  certainty  to  the  allusion,  what  effect  do 
they  give  to  them  ?  Virtually  none.  For  the  most 
part,  this  phase  of  the  subject  is  altogether  ignored, 
or  dismissed  as  unimportant,  with  here  and  there 
an  incidental  reference.  Wellhausen  dismisses  it 
in  a  sentence  of  charming  candor,  and  one  which 
throws  a  valuable  light  on  critical  methods  and 
processes.  He  says :  "  Passages  were  quoted  from 
Amos  and  Hosea  as  implying  an  acquaintance  with 
the  priestly  code,  but  they  were  not  such  as  could 
140 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANXES 


make  any  impression  on  those  who  were  already 
persuaded  that  the  latter  was  more  recent."  ' 

This  mode  of  dealing  with  evidence,  although  even 
more  radical  in  form,  is  akin  to  the  one  announced 
by  the  famous  Western  jurist :  "  I  shall  hold  this 
case  under  advisement  for  about  two  weeks,  but 
shall  eventually  decide  it  in  favor  of  the  plaintiff." 
It  might  well  be  called,  "  Wellhausen's  Short  and 
Easy  Method  with  Traditionalists."  Its  effective- 
ness in  burking  and  otherwise  getting  rid  of  incon- 
venient evidence  is  unsurpassed  and  unsurpassable. 

Kuenen,  however,  is  an  exception.  He  deals  with 
it  in  some  detail,  although  without  reference  to 
many  of  the  passages  relied  on  by  Doctor  Leathes.2 

Occasionally,  as  in  the  case  of  Canon  Driver's 
"  Introduction,"  an  attempt,  more  ingenious  than 
ingenuous,  is  made  to  forestall  and  discount  the  im- 
plications of  these  awkward  facts.  That  writer  in 
effect  says  that  the  "  supposition "  is  that  the 
institutions  of  Israel  are  in  their  origin  of  great 
antiquity ;  but  that  the  laws  respecting  them  were 
gradually  developed  and  elaborated,  and  in  their 
final  shape  are  post-exilic.3  And  he  argues  truly 
enough  :  "  From  this  point  of  view,  the  allusions 
to  priestly  usage  in  the  pre-exilic  literature  may  be 
consistently  explained."4 

1  "  Proleg.,"  p.  II. 

1  Kuenen,  "The  Hexateuch,"  pp.  174-186. 
1  "Introduction,"  etc.,  p.  142.  *  Ibid.y  p.  143. 

141 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 


Most  assuredly.  Indulge  in  suppositions  enough, 
and  let  "supposition"  and  "demonstration"  be 
regarded  as  convertible  terms,  and  no  case  could 
be  put  which  would  be  so  wildly  impossible  but 
that  it  could  be  "consistently  explained." 

Assume  that  as  it  stands  the  Pentateuch  is  a 
dislocated  and  misleading  puzzle-picture,  and  that 
to  be  of  value  it  must  be,  as  it  has  been,  cut  to 
pieces  and  readjusted  on  different  lines  by  the 
critics,  with  all  the  joints  and  seams  showing ; 
assume  that  the  first  is  the  last  and  that  the  last  is 
the  middle ;  assume  that  with  the  art  of  writing 
known  and  practised  for  centuries,  a  creed,  a  sys~ 
tern  of  morals,  a  code  of  laws,  and  a  ritual  came 
into  being,  and  a  history  ran  its  course  without 
written  records  or  initial  legislation  ;  assume  that 
centuries  later  some  shadowy  traditions  of  remote 
events,  more  or  less  historical,  with  some  fragments 
of  anonymous  legislation  were  severally  reduced  to 
writing  no  one  knows  when,  by  no  one  knows  whom, 
and  finally  gravitated  to,  and  found  a  lodgment  in 
the  temple  archives  no  one  knows  how ;  assume 
that  centuries  later  still,  long  after  much  of  it  had 
become  obsolete  and  inoperative  through  lapse  of 
time  and  change  of  circumstance,  this  hetero- 
geneous amalgam  of  myth,  folk  lore,  history,  law, 
and  ritual  was  elaborately  codified  to  give  to  the 
priesthood  inapplicable  instructions  and  to  lay 
upon  them  out-of-date  injunctions,  obedience  to 
142 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANCES 


which  was  a  physical  impossibility  ;  assume  that 
codification  means,  not  what  the  lexicographers  say, 
the  arrangement  and  reduction  to  order  of  existing 
laws,  but  that  it  has  an  elastic  signification  and 
means  indiscriminately  the  collection,  retention, 
alteration,  or  abrogation  of  such  old  laws  and  the 
creation  of  new  and  radically  different  ones,  with 
the  invention  of  a  "  parenetic  framework  "  to  fit ; 
assume  that  not  one  of  the  many  scribes  who  had 
a  hand  in  the  piecemeal  production  wrote  with  a 
single  eye  to  setting  forth  the  facts  as  they  were, 
but  that  each  had  ulterior,  and  generally  sinister, 
motives,  which  motives  are  writ  large  upon  the 
record  ;  assume  that  the  residue  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  of  equal  value,  either  as  being  of  like 
dubious  origin,  or  as  having  been  subjected  to  sim- 
ilar transforming  processes  ;  assume  that  the  phrase 
"  all  critics  are  agreed  "  has  the  force  of  an  axiom  ; 
and  assume,  finally,  that  all  these  assumptions,  in- 
stead of  being  mere  guess  and  surmise,  the  pro- 
jections of  a  vivid  imagination,  are  sound  conclu- 
sions based  on  valid  premises  ;  and  then,  without 
doubt,  "  from  this  point  of  view  "  everything  that 
militates  against  the  completeness  of  the  critical 
case  "may  be  consistently  explained" — consist- 
ently, that  is,  with  the  theory.  That  the  explana- 
tion should  consist  with  the  facts  as  they  were, 
matters  little  or  nothing. 

Our  author  proceeds  :  "  They  (z.  e.,  the  allusions 

143 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

to  priestly  usage)  attest  the  existence  of  certain 
institutions  ;  they  do  not  attest  the  existence  of  the 
particular  document  in  which  the  regulations  touch- 
ing those  institutions  are  now  codified." 

Laying  aside  for  the  moment  "suppositions,'' 
critical  and  other,  it  may  be  said  that  this  claim  is 
based  upon  a  curious  misconception  of  the  office 
and  limitations  of  proof.  Taking  the  word  "  at- 
test "  in  its  natural  meaning  of  "  giving  testimony 
to,"  it  is  surely  a  revolutionary  application  of  the 
laws  of  evidence  to  assert  that  these  allusions  do 
not  furnish  some  evidence  tending  to  establish  the 
existence  of  the  documents,  to  the  contents  of 
which  they  apparently  pointed. 

Now  if  there  were  to  be  found  in  the  pages  of 
some  modern  author  a  statement  to  the  effect  that 
of  all  cants  the  cant  of  criticism  is  the  most  tor- 
menting, the  ordinary  reader  would  at  once  con- 
clude that  the  author  had  read  "  Tristram  Shandy," 
and  that  the  passage  in  question  was,  although  in 
abridged  form,  a  quotation  from  that  whimsical  ex- 
travaganza. But  according  to  the  critical  methods, 
this  conclusion  would  be  entirely  unwarranted. 
It  would  merely  exhibit  "  traces  of  pre-existing" 
views  and  indicate  that  at  that  or  some  earlier 
period  there  were  prevalent — floating  in  the  air,  so 
to  speak — opinions  not  altogether  favorable  to 
critics,  critical  methods,  and  criticism  generally. 

It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  these  references 
144 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANCES 


in  the  "pre-exilic  literature"  are  by  no  means 
confined  to  priestly  usage ;  they  cover  a  much 
wider  field,  as  has  been  already  shown.  With  the 
pentateuchal  legislation,  for  instance,  is  incorpor- 
ated a  historical  narrative,  so  closely  interwoven 
that  the  history  and  the  law  cannot  be  riven  apart 
without  doing  violence,  not  only  to  the  record 
itself,  but  also  to  every  rule  of  common  sense  and 
common  fairness  in  dealing  with  historical  docu- 
ments.1 Does  the  "  supposition  "  evolved  by  the 
critic  afford  grounds  whereby  the  historical  allu- 
sions in  the  prophetic  books  "  may  be  consistently 
explained  "  ?  Hardly  in  any  event ;  surely  not  in 
the  face  of  a  perfectly  obvious  and  natural  expla- 
nation, and  one  which  would  be  at  once  accepted 
as  decisive  in  any  other  controversy  where  evidence 
and  proof  meant  something  more  than  forms  which 
shift  with  every  turn  of  the  kaleidoscope. 

And  the  foregoing  is  equally  applicable  to  the 
case  of  the  multitude  of  prophetical  repetitions 
and  quotations  of  distinctive  pentateuchal  words 
and  phrases  above  referred  to.  Nor  is  it  perceived 
how  the  critical  "  supposition "  mentioned  can 
avail,  in  any  impartial  mind,  to  nullify  the  cumu- 
lative testimony  they  give  to  the  existence  of  a 
body  of  written  law  of  which  the  prophets  made 
lavish  use,  upon  which  they  based  their  warnings 
and  exhortations,    and    whose    ancient   date    and 

1  Kuenen,  "The  Hexateuch,"  p.  32  (marg.  paging,  35). 
K  145 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

divine  authority  they  themselves  fully  recognized, 
confidently  counting  on  and  appealing  to  a  like 
attitude  on  the  part  of  their  hearers. 

Doctor  Driver  follows  with  the  citation  of  pas- 
sages illustrating  the  references  to  "  priestly 
usage,"  whose  evidential  force  he  seeks  so  indus- 
triously to  destroy.  The  list,  by  the  way,  might 
have  been  indefinitely  extended ;  but  few  as  his 
references  are,  one  of  the  examples  he  gives  seems 
to  be  singularly  inappropriate  for  the  purpose  he 
has  in  view.  The  case  instanced  is  that  of  the 
vow  of  the  Nazarite.  He  cites  a  passage  from 
Numbers  (which  he  assigns  to  the  priestly  writer) 
containing  the  law  of  the  Nazarite  ;  passages  from 
Judges  giving  a  concrete  example  of  the  law  in  oper- 
ation, and  one  from  Amos  containing  a  definite 
allusion  to  one  of  the  provisions  of  the  law.  And 
he  says  of  these  passages  {inter  alia)  that  they  are 
proof  that  the  institution  in  question  was  ancient  in 
Israel,  but  not  that  it  was  observed  with  the  precise 
formalities  prescribed  in  the  priestly  code. 

The  prescriptions  in  Numbers,  so  far  as  they 
affect  the  votary  himself  during  the  continuance 
of  his  vow,  are  few  and  simple,  while  they  are 
definite  and  precise.  They  enact  that  when  one 
shall  vow  a  vow  of  a  Nazarite  to  separate  himself 
unto  the  Lord  he  shall  drink  no  wine  or  strong 
drink,  and  there  shall  no  razor  come  upon  his 
head,  that  he  shall  be  holy,  and  shall  let  the  locks 
146 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANCES 


of  the  hair  of  his  head  grow  until  all  the  days  of 
his  separation  be  fulfilled. 

Some  centuries  later  than  the  purported  date  of 
this  law  we  have  an  account  of  a  Nazarite,  Samson, 
given  in  the  early  annals  of  Israel.  In  the  narra- 
tive all  the  above-mentioned  prescriptions  of  the 
so-called  priestly  code  are  present,  couched  in  the 
very  terms  of  the  law  itself ;  the  separation  unto 
the  Lord,  the  abstinence  from  wine  or  strong  drink, 
the  injunction  to  let  the  hair  grow,  with  the  pro- 
hibition of  the  use  of  the  razor.  Some  centuries 
later  still  the  prophet  Amos  complains  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  that  although  the  Lord  had  raised 
up  of  their  young  men  to  be  Nazarites,  yet  they 
"gave  the  Nazarites  wine  to  drink." 

Now  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  this  is  not  evi- 
dence, and  pretty  good  evidence  too,  that  both 
prophet  and  historian  wrote  in  view  of  the  Mosaic 
legislation  quoted,  and  that  this  legislation  then 
existed  in  its  present  form,  inasmuch  as  both  in 
the  enactment  in  Numbers  and  the  narrative  in 
Judges  substance,  phraseology,  and  order  exactly 
coincide.  So  that  in  this  one  instance  at  least 
the  institution  whose  existence  even  the  critics 
admit  "  zvas  observed  zvith  the  precise  formalities 
prescribed  in  P."  l 

It  is  true  that  Samson  did  not  present  himself 
to  the  priest  according  to  the  "  precise  formalities 

1  Driver,  "Introduction,"  etc.,  p.  143. 
147 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

prescribed  in  P  "  to  be  observed  upon  the  expira- 
tion of  time  or  other  sooner  determination  of  the 
days  of  separation,  but  that  was  hardly  his  fault. 
After  his  locks  had  been  shorn  by  Delilah,  thus 
nullifying  his  vow  and  bringing  it  to  an  abrupt 
period,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  he  would 
gladly  have  appeared  before  the  door  of  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation  with  the  prescribed 
offerings.  But  unfortunately  he  was  a  prisoner, 
blind  and  bound,  and  making  sport  for  the  Philis- 
tines at  Gaza.  These  provisions,  therefore,  being 
inapplicable  to  his  case,  the  omission  to  mention 
them  in  the  narrative  in  Judges,  ought  surely  not  to 
be  held  as  evidence  of  their  non-existence,  although 
the  argument  from  silence  has,  on  occasion,  been 
pushed  by  the  critics  to  quite  as  extreme  limits. 

It  is  clear  that  the  prophets  would  have  had  to 
quote  the  Pentateuch  entire  before  the  critics 
would  admit  their  testimony  in  support  of  the 
claim  that  it  existed  in  their  day.  It  is  doubtful, 
indeed,  whether  even  that  would  suffice.  Thus 
Doctor  Driver  notes  many  parts  of  the  earlier 
books  of  Moses  which  are  paralleled  in  Deuter- 
onomy— in  particular  an  important  passage  in  the 
latter  book,  giving  a  list  of  clean  and  unclean 
beasts  which  to  a  large  extent  is  verbally  identical 
with  one  in  Leviticus.  And  the  inference  he 
draws  is,  not  as  would  naturally  be  supposed,  that 
the  one  is  a  quotation  from  the  other,  but  that  it 
148 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANCES 


is  probable  that  both  are  divergent  recensions  of 
an  unspecified  and  unknown  original,1  for  whose 
existence  there  is  not  and  never  has  been  the 
shadow  of  a  warrant.  Could  the  force  of  ingenuity 
further  go  ?  At  one  breath  they  destroy  the  in- 
tegrity of  a  document  which  has  weathered  two 
thousand  years  of  attack,  and  at  the  same  time 
create  out  of  nothing  a  brand  new  "  source,"  the 
tenor  of  which  they  may,  no  man  forbidding  them, 
change,  augment,  or  diminish  at  will  to  meet  the 
varying  needs  of  their  case  as  they  arise. 

The  plain  man,  with  his  weakness  for  the  ob- 
vious and  the  normal,  stands  helpless  in  the  pres- 
ence of  such  thaumaturgic  dexterity  as  this.  A 
certain  document  refers  to  John  Smith,  and  what 
is  said  of  him  answers  fairly  well  to  the  description 
of  the  man  he  knows  by  that  name.  But  he  is 
told  that  although  John  Smith  is  mentioned,  it  does 
not  mean  John  Smith,  but  some  other  Smith  whom 
no  one  has  ever  seen  or  heard  of,  and  whose  person- 
ality is  as  shadowy  and  unsubstantial  as  the  John 
Doe  of  legal  fiction.  If  the  discussion  were  on 
any  other  subject,  especially  if  it  affected  his  per- 
sonal welfare,  he  would  at  once  insistently  respond  : 
"  Produce  your  fugacious  double  or  account  for 
his  non-appearance,  or  at  least  give  us  some  proof 
that  he  ever  existed  at  all  and  what  has  become  of 
him."     But  in  this  forum   where  the  voices  only 

1  Driver,  "Introduction,"  etc.,  pp.  144,  145. 
149 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

of  the  pundit  and  the  professor  may  be  heard,  he 
is  awed  into  a  silent,  if  dubious  and  unwilling, 
acquiescence  by  the  twin  bogies  of  science  and 
scholarship. 

A  typical  example  of  the  manner  in  whicn  rhe 
critics  minimize  by  adroit  handling  the  effect  of 
adverse  texts  is  to  be  seen  in  their  treatment  of 
the  passage  in  Hosea  which  has  heretofore  been 
regarded  as  showing  that  in  his  time,  at  least,  a 
substantial  body  of  written  law  was  in  existence. 

The  Authorized  version  translates  the  passage  : 
"  I  have  written  to  him  the  great  things  of  my 
law"  (Hos.  8:12).  The  Revised  version  gives  : 
"  Though  I  write  for  him  my  law  in  ten  thousand 
precepts  "  ;  with  the  marginal  alternate:  "  I  wrote 
for  him  the  ten  thousand  precepts  of  my  law." 
Ewald,  writing  thirty  years  ago,  before  the  exilic 
origin  of  the  priestly  code  became  the  primary 
article  of  the  critical  creed,  renders  the  passage 
(or  his  English  translator  does  for  him)  :  "  I  write 
for  him  by  myriads  my  doctrines " ;  and  says 
that  the  genuine  Israelitish,  Mosaic  laws  at  that 
time  had  been  very  generally  reduced  to  writing.1 

Wellhausen,  who  cannot  endure  that  aught  but 
oral  tradition  and  priestly  praxis  should  be  in  ex- 
istence at  that  early  date,  makes  it   read  :    "  How 

1  Ewald,  "Prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,"  Eng.  trans., 
Vol.  I.,  pp.  265,  271. 

I50 


THE    UNEQUAL    BALANCES 


many  soever  my  instructions  may  be";1  and 
Driver  simply  refers  to  it  as  the  "  Torah  "  of  Jeho- 
vah, which  it  was  the  office  of  the  priests  to  in- 
culcate and  uphold.2  George  Adam  Smith  only 
mentions  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  suggest  the  infer- 
ence that  no  such  writings  existed.  His  version 
is  :  "  Were  I  to  write  for  him  by  myriads  my  laws, 
as  those  of  a  stranger  would  they  be  accounted."  3 
For  this  reading  he  resorts  to  the  Septuagint,  of 
whose  authors  he  had  previously  said  that  some  of 
their  mistranslations  are  outrageous,  not  only  in 
obscure  passages  where  they  may  be  pardoned,  but 
even  where  there  are  parallel  terms  with  which 
they  show  themselves  familiar.4  Such  as  it  was, 
however,  it  suited  his  purpose  better  than  the 
Masoretic  text. 

It  is  submitted  that  this  is  not  the  attitude  of 
men  who  are  endeavoring  simply  to  get  at  the 
truth,  but  rather  of  strenuous  advocates  so  domi- 
nated by  their  own  prepossessions  as  in  effect  to 
say  :  "  We  have  a  theory  to  defend,  and  whatever 
appears  to  support  it,  is  sure  to  be  true "  ; 5  and 
conversely. 

1  Wellhausen,  "Pro/eg.,"  etc.,  p.  57. 

2  Driver,  "  Introd.,"  p.  305. 

8  G.  A.  Smith,  "Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets,"  Vol.  I., 
pp.  278,  221. 

*  Ibid. 

6  Andrew  Lang,  "Myth,  Ritual,  and  Religion,"  Vol.  II., 
p.  364. 

151 


XI 
THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  SILENCE 


The  assumption  that  non-mention  or  silence  is  equivalent 
to  denial,  is  groundless.  Abundantly  as  "the  argument 
from  silence"  is  employed,  no  assumption  is  more  thor- 
oughly disproved  by  human  experience.  It  forms  an  es- 
sential part  of  the  denial  of  the  Hexateuch  narrative.  Well- 
hausen  and  Kuenen  never  weary  of  saying  that  such  a 
writer  "knows  nothing"  of  some  matter.  A  rapid  but  not 
exhaustive  glance  over  the  pages  of  Kuenen' s  Hexateuch 
detects  the  phrase  or  its  equivalent  occurring  thirty-four 
times.  Occasionally  it  is  added  that  there  is  silence  where 
mention  might  be  expected.  But  who  knows  what  might 
be  expected  of  any  writer  ?  Silence  often  occurs  in  connec- 
tion with  the  best  known  facts  ;  and  abundant  cases  in  point 
are  furnished  by  those  who  have  given  it  any  attention. 
Illustrative  facts  could  be  cited  indefinitely.  There  is  no 
more  precarious  assumption  for  an  argument. 

— Samuel  Colcord  Bartlett. 


XI 

THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    SILENCE 

Making  the  ephah  small,  and  the  shekel  great. 

— Amos.f-fJ" 

This  inherent  vice  of  the  critical  method  is 
nowhere  more  apparent,  or  more  conspicuously 
unfair,  than  in  the  validity  which  it  claims  for  and 
denies  to  the  argument  from  silence  according  as 
it  tells  in  favor  of  or  militates  against  the  theory 
which  holds  the  field  for  the  time  being. 

The  nature  of  that  argument  is  thus  stated  by 
Professor  Margoliouth  : 

The  argument  from  silence  represents  the  following  series 
of  syllogisms.  Had  B  existed  in  the  time  of  the  author  A, 
the  latter  must  have  known  of  B.  Had  A  known  of  B,  he 
must  have  mentioned  or  cited  B.  But  A  neither  mentions 
nor  cites  B.     Therefore  B  did  not  exist  in  A' s  time. 

And  he  comments  thereupon  in  this  wise : 

It  is  clear  that  this  argument  involves  two  assumptions 
which  are  not  always  capable  of  demonstration.  Human 
action  is  characterized  by  fitfulness,  whence  it  is  not  abso- 
lutely certain  that  a  man  will  perform  an  act  which  he  may 
be  well  expected  to  perform.  Hence,  while  knowing  of  B, 
he  may  for  some  unknown  reason  fail  to  mention  B.     Or, 

155 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

though  the  chance  of  his  having  failed  to  hear  of  B  may  be 
exceedingly  small,  it  is  often  difficult  to  deny  the  admissi- 
bility of  such  a  chance.1 

Or,  to  put  it  bluntly,  the  argument  from  silence 
is  not  worth  the  paper  it  is  written  on.  Some- 
times the  conclusion  happens  to  be  true,  and  some- 
times not ;  but  when  it  does,  it  is  not  because 
it  necessarily  follows  from  the  premises.  In 
other  words,  it  is  largely  matter  of  guesswork ; 
and  when  there  is  guessing  to  be  done,  most  men 
prefer  to  do  it  for  themselves. 

But,  notwithstanding  the  inconclusive  character 
of  this  argument,  and  its  consequent  worthlessness 
from  a  logical  point  of  view,  great  dependence  is 
placed  upon  it  by  the  critics,  and  sweeping  conclu- 
sions are  drawn  from  it.  Indeed,  there  is  scarcely 
a  phase  of  the  subject  in  which  it  has  not  been 
pressed  into  service  in  some  form  or  other.  Only, 
however,  when  it  tends  to  give  a  fancied  support 
to  critical  attacks  on  the  integrity  of  the  Scriptures ; 
for  all  other  purposes  the  critics  themselves  would 
be  the  first  to  recognize  its  fallacy. 

Doctor  Watson,  in  "Lex  Mosaica,"  at  page  286, 
comments  on  the  frequency  with  which,  in  certain 
critical  works,  the  phrase  occurs  :  "  The  author 
knows  nothing  "  of  this,  that,  or  the  other  institu- 
tion or  provision,  the  non-existence  of  which  the 
critic  is  seeking  to  prove.     He  truly  says  that  "the 

1  Margoliouth,  "Lines  of  Defense,"  etc.,  p.  175. 

156 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    SILENCE 


phrase  has  the  merit  or  demerit  of  combining 
fact  with  inference.  The  fact  is,  *  the  authoi  says 
nothing '  ;  the  inference  is,  '  he  knew  nothing  be- 
cause there  was  nothing  for  him  to  know.'  "  And 
he  adds  :  "  We  may  venture  the  statement  that  the 
formula  '  the  author  knows  nothing  '  has  the  nature 
of  a  suggestio  falsi,  and  that  '  we  know  nothing ' 
expresses  with  considerably  greater  exactness  the 
true  facts  of  the  case."  Which  would  seem  to  be 
the  plain  common  sense  of  the  matter. 

Many  specimens  might  be  given  ;  a  few  repre- 
sentative ones  will  suffice.  Thus,  Professor  Briggs 
asserts  as  one  of  the  four  main  foundations  of  the 
critical  position,  "  a  silence  in  the  historical,  pro- 
phetical, poetical,  and  ethical  writings  as  to  many 
of  the  chief  institutions  of  the  pentateuchal  legis- 
lation";1 the  inference  being,  of  course,  that  no 
such  institutions  existed.  Here,  as  we  see,  Pro- 
fessor Briggs  and  Canon  Driver  part  company  ;  the 
former  treating  the  institutions  and  the  legislation 
as  inseparable,  the  latter  holding  that  the  institu- 
tions existed  while  the  legislation  did  not.  He  is 
simply  more  cautious  than  his  American  congener, 
casting  an  anchor  to  windward  in  his  attempt  to 
offset  the  awkward  implications  of  the  passages 
considered  in  the  preceding  chapter — which  pas- 
sages (as  Doctor  Driver  perceives)  are  a  direct 
refutation  of  Professor  Briggs'  claim. 

1  Briggs,  "  Higher  Criticism  of  the  Hexateuch,"  p.  96. 
157 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

Prof.  Robertson  Smith  attaches  equal  importance 
to  the  argument  from  silence.  His  references  are 
frequent  and  wide-reaching.  Taking  for  granted 
the  necessary  assumptions  named  by  Professor 
Margoliouth,  his  conclusions  substantially  cover  the 
whole  ground  of  critical  controversy  : 

The  law  was  as  little  known  in  Shiloh  as  among  the 
masses  of  the  people  ;  .  .  the  Deuteronomic  code  was  un- 
known to  Isaiah  ;  .  .  the  complete  system  of  the  Penta- 
teuch was  not  known  in  the  period  of  the  kings  of  Judah, 
even  as  the  theoretic  constitution  of  Israel  ;  .  .  Deuter- 
onomy knows  no  Levites  who  cannot  be  priests,  and  no  priests 
who  are  not  Levites  ;  .  .  and  the  Deuteronomic  histor- 
ical retrospect  was  silent  about  the  priestly  tabernacle  and 
its  ordinances,  and  ignored  the  whole  series  of  revelations 
to  Moses  and  Aaron  on  which  the  priestly  system  of 
Israel's  sanctity  rests  ;l 

and  many  similar  passages  which  might  be  cited. 

Kuenen  makes  a  novel  use  of  the  argument. 
He  first  creates  the  silence  by  deletion  from  the 
text,  and  then  argues  upon  it.  He  says  in  effect 
that  neither  the  prophets  nor  the  older  historical 
books  know  of  the  distinction  between  priests  and 
Levites  ;  nor  of  the  exclusive  fitness  of  the  "  sons 
of  Aaron."2  He  admits  that  in  I  Kings  8  :  I,  the 
priests  are  distinguished  from  the  Levites ;  but 
treats  it  as  a  mere  clerical  error,  which  he  corrects, 

1  Robertson  Smith,  "Old  Testament  in  Jewish  Church,"  pp. 
271,  355,  359,  360,391. 

2  Kuenen,  "Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  300  f. 

•58 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    SILENCE 


wonderful  to  relate,  by  a  reference  to  the  Chroni- 
cler ;  while  on  the  very  next  page  he  says  :  "  It  is 
highly  contrary  to  true  criticism  to  side  with  the 
Chronicler  in  the  conflict  between  these  writings 
and  the  older  historical  books."  l  Excepting,  natu- 
rally those  rare  cases  in  which  the  Chronicler  lends 
support  to  some  critical  view,  in  which  event,  as  in 
the  instance  just  quoted,  their  confidence  in  him  is 
so  absolute  as  to  be  childlike. 

Driver  and  Wellhausen  find  the  argument  equally 
useful ;  the  latter  regarding  it  as  "  nothing  more 
nor  less  than  the  universally  valid  method  of 
historical  investigation."2 

Indeed,  it  seems  to  be  an  indispensable  item  in 
the  critics'  outfit ;  and  it  is  easy  to  see  that  their 
progress  would  be  greatly  hampered  if  not  entirely 
hindered  should  they  by  any  misfortune  be  de- 
prived of  its  aid.  But,  as  an  argument,  standing 
alone,  what  does  it  prove  ?  Absolutely  nothing. 
The  assumptions  essential  to  its  validity  are  in 
ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred  altogether 
unprovable,  and  in  the  hundredth  case  doubtful. 

Their  own  high  estimate  of  its  value,  however, 
has  odd  reservations.  It  is  not  a  weapon  which  can 
be  safely  put  into  everybody's  hands.  It  is  only 
really  sound  when  an  expert  critic  needs  it  to  patch 
out  a  case.     Its  use  by  a  "  traditionalist "  ought 

1  Kuenen,  "Religion  of  Israel, "  Vol.  II.,  p.  301. 

2  "  Proleg.,"  p.  365. 

159 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

to  be  discouraged,  if  not  strictly  prohibited;  he 
would  be  sure  to  draw  some  inconvenient  inference 
from  it.  The  book  of  Deuteronomy,  for  example, 
forged,  as  "  all  critics  are  agreed,"  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah,  about  620  b.  c,  is  emphatic  as  to  the  one 
sanctuary  and  its  requirement  of  the  centralized 
worship  of  Israel  thereat.  The  injunction  is : 
"  Unto  the  place  which  the  Lord  your  God  shall 
choose,  out  of  all  your  tribes  to  put  his  name  there, 
even  unto  his  habitation  shall  ye  seek,  and  thither 
shalt  thou  come"  (Deut.  12  :  5). 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  author  of  Deuteronomy, 
whoever  he  may  have  been,  is  silent  on  three  im- 
portant points.  He  speaks  from  the  standpoint  of 
an  undivided  Israel :  "  The  place  which  the  Lord 
your  God  shall  choose  out  of  all  your  tribes,"  is 
the  language  used.  He  "  knows  nothing  "  of  the 
disruption  by  which  Israel  and  Judah  became  sep- 
arate and  hostile  kingdoms.  He  speaks  as  of  a 
time  when  the  place  of  the  sanctuary  had  not  been 
chosen ;  he  says :  "  The  place  which  the  Lord 
your  God  shall  choose."  He  "  knows  nothing  "  of 
Shiloh,  "  My  place  where  I  caused  my  name  to 
dwell  at  the  first  "  (Jer.  7  :  12).  He  "  knows  noth- 
ing "  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  as  to  which  God 
had  said  :  "  He  (t.  e.  Solomon)  shall  build  an  house 
for  my  name  "  (2  Sam.  7:13).  Therefore,  accord- 
ing to  the  critics'  favorite  argument  from  silence, 
Deuteronomy  was  written  before  the  revolt  of  the 
160 


THE   ARGUMENT    FROM    SILENCE 


ten  tribes,  before  the  building  of  the  temple,  and 
before  the  establishment  of  the  "  house  of  God  " 
at  Shiloh  in  the  days  of  the  judges.  Of  course  it 
is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  imagined  that  they 
would  admit  its  applicability  to  a  case  like  that. 
It  is  only  when  it  attacks  the  integrity  of  Scrip- 
ture that  they  regard  it  with  anything  like  favor. 

Other  apt  opportunities  for  its  use  are  sug- 
gested by  Professor  Margoliouth  in  a  numerous 
group  of  psalms  containing  date  indications  point- 
ing to  their  collection  in  Davidic  times,  notably 
the  Seventy-eighth,  which  epitomizes  Israel's  his- 
tory up  to  that  period  and  no  further. 

The  professor  says : 

The  psalmists  who  versify  the  sacred'  history  must  have 
known  of  the  glories  of  the  Solomonic  era,  and  of  the  split- 
ting of  the  nation,  if  they  lived  after  the  close  of  the  mon- 
archical period  ;  why,  then,  do  they  become  vague  after  the 
accession  of  David  or  earlier  ?  If  they  belong  to  the  period 
of  the  divided  kingdom,  why  do  we  find  no  trace  of  the 
hostility  which  ordinarily  prevailed  between  the  two  divi- 
sions of  Israel,  and  no  aspirations  after  reunion  ?  Why  are 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh  given  an  honorable  place  beside 
Judah  and  Benjamin  ?  The  later  we  place  the  collection  the 
stronger  does  the  argument  from  silence  become.1 

That  Professor  Cheyne,  at  any  rate,  sets  no  great 
store  by  it  is  evident,  for  with  a  serene  disregard 
for  the  burden  of  proof  and  the  one  on  whom  it 

1  "Lines  of  Defense,"  etc.,  p.  189. 
L  161 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

should  properly  rest,  he  decides  for  the  late  date 
of  the  entire  Psalter  on  the  ground  that  there  is 
no  evidence  of  the  existence  of  any  pre-exilic  psalm 
— not  even  that  furnished  by  the  argument  from 
silence.  And  his  brethren  of  the  critical  fold  are 
doubtless  in  substantial  accord  with  him. 

What  reason  there  is  in  the  nature  of  things 
why  sauce  for  the  conservative  goose  should  not 
also  be  sauce  for  the  critical  gander  the  com- 
mon man  can  never  be  made  rightly  to  under- 
stand. But  so  the  whole  sorry  process  moves 
along,  limping  with  unequal  feet,  carrying  in  its 
bag  divers  weights,  a  great  and  a  small,  with  one 
measure  to  apply  to  attacks  upon  the  Bible,  and 
another  to  its  defense,  reducing  the  principles  of 
logic  to  a  nullity,  and  robbing  all  evidence  of 
every  iota  of  probative  force.  Of  course,  choos- 
ing their  own  forum  and  being  themselves  the 
judges  of  the  relevance  and  weight  of  testimony, 
when  it  is  to  be  emphasized  and  when  ignored, 
adjusting  the  sliding  scale  to  the  exigencies  of 
the  immediate  situation,  they  can  "  prove "  any- 
thing and  everything  ;  but  if  at  the  bar  of  any 
orderly  tribunal,  where  one  rule  obtained  alike 
for  the  affirmative  and  the  defense  they  should 
resort  to  their  customary  tactics,  they  would  be 
unable  to  prove  ownership  in  a  dog  case,  even  if 
they  escaped  a  reprimand  from  the  bench  for  dis- 
ingenuous trifling  with  the  court. 
162 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    SILENCE 


The  concluding  section  of  Wellhausen's  "Prole- 
gomena" being  a  reprint  of  the  article  "  Israel  " 
in  the  "Encyclopedia  Britannica,"  gives  a  fairly  de- 
tailed sketch  of  the  history  of  Israel  and  Judah 
from  the  earliest  times  down  to  the  fifteenth 
century  of  the  Christian  era  ;  and  yet  from  begin- 
ning to  end  the  name  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is 
not  once  mentioned.  Surely  he  was  a  Jew  whose 
life  and  death  were  fraught  with  the  most  mo- 
mentous consequences  for  Israel,  and  yet  the 
current  of  the  narrative  embracing  the  period  of 
his  career  flows  on  without  even  the  suggestion 
of  an  event  which  stirred  to  its  depths  the  life 
of  the  Jewish  people,  and  deflected  the  course  of 
their  history  for  all  time.  What  does  the  argument 
from  silence  prove  in  this  case  ? 


163 


XII 

THE   ARGUMENT    FROM 
NON-OBSERVANCE 


Moses  was  the  divine  prohibitionist.  Nine-tenths  of  his 
emphasis  lies  on  the  "Thou  shalt  not."  But  the  point 
that  pierces  us  in  this  revelation  through  Moses  is  that 
every  « •  Thou  shalt  not "  is  a  disclosure  of  what  men  have 
done,  and  are  prone  to  do,  and  would  like  to  do  again  if 
they  dared.  The  commandments  sound  like  a  shouting 
from  the  mountain-top  of  the  secrets  of  many  hearts.  After 
each  divine  word  which  says,  "Thou  shall  not,"  follows  a 
human  murmur  which  says,  "But  I  will." 

Blot  out  the  prediction  of  Christ,  and  Moses  stands  as  an 
embodiment  of  failure — a  leader  who  emancipated  the  na- 
tion and  condemned  the  race  ;  the  messenger  of  a  divine 
law  which  was  broken  even  while  he  was  carrying  it  down 
from  the  burning  mount.  — Henry  Van  Dyke. 


XII 

THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    NON-OBSERVANCE 

I  have  written  to  him  the  great  things  of  my  law  ;  but 
they  were  counted  as  a  strange  thing.  Hosea.  t:  M . 

They  have  forsaken  the  Lord  ;  they  have  provoked  the 
Holy  One  of  Israel  ;  they  are  gone  away  backward. 

— Isaiah./:  if  t 

They  have  perverted  their  way,  and  they  have  forgotten 
the  Lord  their  God.  —Jeremiah.  J*  At 

Equal,  if  not  greater,  importance  is  attached 
by  the  critics  to  the  argument  from  non-observance. 
Indeed,  it  is  one  of  the  foundation  pillars  of  their 
whole  superstructure.  The  gravamen  of  the  criti- 
cal complaint  against  what  they  are  pleased  to 
term  the  "traditional  theory"  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  that  it  presents  an  irreconcilable  conflict 
between  the  law  of  Moses  and  the  history  of 
Israel ;  and  one  of  the  chief  merits  claimed  for 
the  latest  phase  of  the  "  higher  criticism  "  is  that, 
for  the  first  time,  it  brings  the  law  and  the  history 
into  harmonious  relations. l 

Without  going  into  details,  or  specifying  par- 
ticular instances,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  say  broadly 

1  Prof.  Robertson  Smith's  preface  to  Wellhausen's  "Prole- 
gomena." 

i67 


THE   HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

that  this  position  is  sought  to  be  substantiated  by 
showing  that  the  course  of  Israelitish  history  from 
the  time  of  the  judges  onward  is  throughout  char- 
acterized, not  only  by  a  general,  not  to  say  universal, 
disregard  of  definite  and  fundamental  institutions 
and  provisions  of  the  Mosaic  law  and  ritual,  but 
also  by  direct,  open,  and  flagrant  violations  of  the 
prohibitions  thereof,  and  by  the  practice  of  a 
promiscuous  and  gross  polytheism.  The  claim  is 
that  these  features  in  the  religious  life  of  the  peo- 
ple, pronounced  as  they  are,  and  persisting  as  they 
do,  even  to  the  time  of  the  captivity,  admit  of  but 
one  conclusion.  That  conclusion  is  that  the  Mo- 
saic law,  as  we  now  have  it,  was  not  in  existence 
before  the  exile ;  and  that  faith  in  the  one  and 
only  God  which  has  for  twenty  centuries  been  re- 
garded as  held  from  the  beginning  by  the  elect 
and  faithful  in  Israel  was  merely  a  "  conception  " 
which  slowly  and  painfully  struggled  into  being 
well  toward  the  close  of  the  pre-exilic  period. 

It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  sacred  history 
does  set  out  a  state  of  facts  from  which  it  might 
fairly  be  inferred  that  both  Israel  and  Judah  were 
guilty  of  the  practices  charged  against  them.  The 
bulk  of  the  nation  did  disregard  Mosaic  institu- 
tions ;  they  were  unmindful  of  the  ten  thousand 
precepts  of  the  law,  counting  them  as  a  strange 
thing ;  they  did  at  the  outset  and  incessantly  vio- 
late its  prohibitions,  moral  and  ritual ;  and  they 
168 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    NON-OBSERVANCE 

were  inveterate  idolaters,  hastening  after  strange 
gods  and  forgetting  their  covenant  with  Jehovah. 

Nor  can  it  be  questioned  that  these  things,  stand- 
ing alone  and  without  explanation,  might  raise  a 
presumption  in  favor  of  the  critical  hypothesis  that 
the  pentateuchal  legislation  was  not  in  existence, 
and  that  the  great  truth  of  the  Divine  Unity  was 
not  then  known  to  them. 

But  the  critics  either  preserve  a  discreet  silence 
on,  or  in  various  ways  minimize  the  force  of  the 
significant  fact  that  concurrently  with  these  un- 
varnished accounts  of  the  misdoings  of  Israel,  the 
historian  from  time  to  time  characterizes  this  con- 
duct, recognizing  it  as  sin  against  light  and  knowl- 
edge, violative  of  their  covenant  with  Jehovah,  and 
a  departure  from  the  God  of  their  fathers.  Con- 
temporaneous prophets  too  tell  the  same  tale. 
Pointing  persistently  to  the  past,  by  line  upon  line, 
and  precept  upon  precept,  they  reiterate  exhorta- 
tion, warning,  rebuke,  and  threatening.  They  de- 
nounce both  Israel  and  Judah,  not  for  failing  to 
advance  along  lines  of  progress  indicated  by  suc- 
cessive prophetic  utterances,  not  for  refusing  to 
embrace  new  truth  as  it  is  unfolded,  or  to  obey 
new  commandments  as  they  are  given  forth  from 
time  to  time  by  the  hand  of  the  prophets,  but  for 
backsliding,  for  retrogression  from  an  earlier  and  a 
purer  standard,  for  turning  aside  from  "  the  old 
path,  the  good  way,"  forgetting  their  Maker,  trans- 
169 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

gressing  his  covenant,  and  trespassing  against  his 
laws.  And  they  make  these  appeals  in  the  evident 
assurance  that  the  facts  upon  which  they  are  based 
will  neither  be  unknown  nor  misunderstood  nor 
denied  by  the  people  to  whom  they  are  addressed. 

It  would  seem  to  be  beyond  question  that  these 
accompanying  circumstances,  characterizing  and 
qualifying  the  narrative,  put  a  new  face  upon  the 
matter,  exhibiting  the  facts  in  an  entirely  different 
light,  and  constituting  a  complete  rebuttal  of  the 
presumptions  out  of  which  the  critical  theories  are 
mainly  manufactured.  It  is  elementary  law  that 
when  a  party  seeks  to  take  advantage  of  an  admis- 
sion he  is  bound  to  take  the  whole  of  such  admis- 
sion as  it  stands,  and  is  not  at  liberty  to  select  the 
parts  which  please  him  while  rejecting  the  remain- 
der. He  may  not  isolate  facts  from  their  context, 
but  must  take  the  statement  with  all  its  qualifica- 
tions and  explanations.  Nor  may  he,  while  relying 
on  the  admission,  impeach  the  authenticity  of  in- 
convenient parts  of  it  without  any  other  evidence 
than  that  they  do  not  consist  with  his  theory  of 
the  case.  If  the  critics  were  held  to  this  rule,  and 
it  is  not  to  be  denied  that  it  is  a  salutary  one,  their 
whole  occupation  would  be  gone  forever,  and  the 
"  historical  criticism"  of  Wellhausen  and  his  fol- 
lowing would  become  a  relic  of  the  past. 

At  its  best,  moreover,  the  argument  from  non- 
observance  is  a  poor  foundation  on  which  to  build, 
170 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    NON-OBSERVANCE 

as  a  modern  instance  or  two  will  show.  The  his- 
tory of  England  during  the  reigns  of  the  Tudors 
and  the  earlier  Stuarts  presents  to  the  student  the 
spectacle  of  a  people  theoretically  free,  but  prac- 
tically enslaved, — at  least  so  far  as  the  certainty  of 
their  civil  rights,  the  quiet  possession  of  their  prop- 
erty, and  the  inviolability  of  their  liberty  and  life 
were  concerned.  Popular  rights  were  invaded  and 
disregarded ;  the  property  of  wealthy  merchants 
was  confiscated  under  the  form  of  "benevolences"  ; 
men  of  substance,  and  even  nobles,  were  outlawed 
on  the  flimsiest  pretenses  so  that  their  goods 
might  escheat  to  the  crown  ;  and  the  life  and  lib- 
erty of  all  were  at  the  mercy  of  the  king's  caprice. 
As  one  of  the  engines  of  this  oppression,  a  com- 
mittee of  the  king's  council,  anciently  possessing 
legitimate  jurisdiction  over  the  behavior  of  sheriffs, 
was  erected  into  a  court  of  law  to  determine  civil 
rights,  the  members  of  which  being  "sole  judges 
of  the  law,  the  fact,  and  the  penalty,"  untram- 
meled  by  a  jury,  usurped  "powers  the  most  dan- 
gerous and  unconstitutional "  over  persons  and 
property,  in  the  devising  of  means  the  most  cor- 
rupt and  iniquitous  "to  harass  the  subject  and  en- 
rich the  crown."1  This  state  of  things  continued 
without  substantial  betterment  until,  with  the  aboli- 
tion of  Star  Chamber  and  other  oppressive  tribu- 
nals, the  whole  system  of  arbitrary  exaction  and 

1  Sharswood's  "  Blackstone,"  Book  IV.,  pp.  266,  310. 
171 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

injustice  was  swept  away  by  the  Long  Parliament 
in  1640. 

But,  notwithstanding  all  this  array  of  diametric- 
ally opposing  facts,  there  exists  a  tradition,  appar- 
ently fortified  by  documentary  evidence,  that  four 
hundred  and  twenty-five  years  earlier,  on  the  field 
of  Runnymede,  the  mailed  barons  of  England 
wrested  from  King  John  what,  though  in  the  form 
of  a  charter,  was  in  reality  a  great  code  of  laws,1 
one  of  whose  provisions  reads  :  "  No  freeman  shall 
be  taken  or  imprisoned  or  disseised  or  outlawed  or 
banished  or  in  any  ways  destroyed,  nor  will  we  pass 
upon  him,  nor  will  we  send  upon  him,  unless  by  the 
lawful  judgment  of  his  peers  or  by  the  law  of  the 
land."  The  story  runs  that  eighty  years  later,  King 
Edward  L,  sometimes  called  the  English  Justinian, 
solemnly  ratified  this  code  by  statute  declaring  that 
any  judgments  thenceforth  given  "against  the 
points  of  the  charter  should  be  undone  and  holden 
for  naught";  and  at  that  early  date  settled  the 
model  of  distributive  justice  as  it  exists  to-day. 

Here  we  have,  presented  in  its  sharpest  form, 
the  famous  critical  "  conflict  between  the  law  and 
the  history."  In  the  face  of  the  palpable  incom- 
patibility of  the  undeniable  historical  facts  here 
enumerated  with  this  so-called  thirteenth  century 
legislation,  can  any  one  doubt  that  this  is  a  clear 

1  Pollock  and  Maitland,  "History  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  I., 
p.  150. 

172 


THE   ARGUMENT    FROM    NON-OBSERVANCE 


case  of  Wellhausen's  "artificial  repristination  "  over 
again  ;  a  "  dramatic  setting  forth  as  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  history  of  ideals  and  principles  which 
did  not  prevail  for  centuries  thereafter"  ? 

This  legislation  belongs,  at  the  earliest,  to  the 
period  of  the  Protectorate  ;  and  its  promulgation 
is,  without  doubt,  carried  back  into  the  remote  past, 
merely  to  give  the  dignity  of  antiquity  to  laws 
which  found  no  effectual  expression  in  the  history 
of  the  English  people  until  the  latter  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  And  yet  there  are  benighted 
"traditionalists"  such  as  Hallam  and  Blackstone, 
Freeman  and  Gardiner,  who  still  insist  that  John 
and  his  barons  signed  Magna  Charta  in  121 5,  and 
that  the  statute  "  Confirmatio  Chartarum "  was 
enacted  under  Edward  I.  in  1297. 

Or,  to  take  another  notable  instance  from  the 
history  of  our  own  country  :  On  the  fourth  of  July, 
1776,  the  first  Congress  of  the  United  States  pro- 
mulgated with  imposing  solemnities  the  Declara- 
tion which  formulated  the  principles  upon  which 
the  new-born  nation  was  to  be  founded.  After  the 
preamble,  the  first  clause  of  this  document  begins  : 

We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self-evident  :  That  all  men  are 
created  equal  ;  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with 
certain  inalienable  rights  ;  that  among  them  are  life,  liberty, 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness  ;  that  to  secure  these  rights, 
governments  are  instituted  among  men,  deriving  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed. 

173 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

But  the  history  of  the  nation  demonstrates  con- 
clusively that  during  the  first  century  of  its  exist- 
ence, it  not  only  ignored  every  one  of  these  basic 
principles  upon  which  it  claimed  to  be  established, 
but  it  deliberately  and  affirmatively  violated  them 
under  the  forms  of  law,  and  engaged  every  branch 
of  its  government,  legislative,  judicial,  and  execu- 
tive, in  the  maintenance  and  support  of  such  vio- 
lations. During  most  of  that  period,  the  nation 
denied  in  act  what  at  its  inception  it  had  solemnly 
affirmed  in  word  :  namely,  that  all  men  were  created 
equal,  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  the  inalien- 
able rights  of  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  hap- 
piness. Not  only  was  a  considerable  proportion  of 
its  population  held  in  complete  and  abject  slavery, 
bought  and  sold  as  chattels  in  the  open  market,  and 
with  no  status  as  human  beings  in  the  eyes  of  the 
law,  but  this  relic  of  barbarism  flourished  for  near  a 
hundred  years,  and  needed  a  bloody  war  to  bring 
it  to  a  period.  And  even  to  this  day  the  equality  re- 
garded as  axiomatic  by  the  Declaration  is  still  but  an 
abstract  ideal  awaiting  realization  in  the  far  future. 

May  not  the  historical  critic  of,  say,  2900  a.  d., 
decide  that  the  execution  of  such  a  document  at 
such  a  time  was  a  manifest  impossibility,  contra- 
dicted in  its  every  item  by  every  feature  of  the 
subsequent  history  of  the  nation  ?  Or,  again  to 
borrow  the  critical  catchword  :  "  The  law  and  the 
history  are  in  irreconcilable  conflict." 

i74 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    NON-OBSERVANCE 

May  he  not  say  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, using  Wellhausen's  own  language  as  to 
the  giving  of  the  law  upon  Sinai,  that 

it  has  only  a  formal,  not  to  say  dramatic,  significance  ;  that 
it  is  the  product  of  the  poetic  necessity  for  such  a  represen- 
tation of  the  manner  in  which  the  nation  was  constituted  as 
should  appeal  directly  and  graphically  to  the  imagination  ; 
and  that  for  the  sake  of  producing  a  solemn  and  vivid  im- 
pression, that  is  represented  as  having  taken  place  in  a  sin- 
gle thrilling  day,  which  in  reality  occurred  slowly  and 
almost  unobserved  ! l 

In  short,  that  it  is  a  mere  "reflection  of  the  present 
cast  back  into  the  past"  ;  a  spectacular  portrayal, 
as  at  the  birth  of  the  nation,  of  conditions  which 
were  the  gradual  product  of  far  later  stages  in  its 
historical  development.  With  just  as  much  warrant 
may  this  claim  be  asserted  in  the  one  case  as  in 
the  other. 

1  "Prolegomena"  p.  439. 


«75 


XIII 

THE  EXTERNAL  EVIDENCES 
BABYLONIAN 


We  may  now  sum  up  the  results  of  the  latest  discovery 
in  Assyriology.  It  has  forever  shattered  the  "critical" 
theory  which  would  put  the  prophets  before  the  law  ;  it  has 
thrown  light  on  the  form  and  character  of  the  Mosaic  code  ; 
and  it  has  indirectly  vindicated  the  historical  character  of 
the  narratives  of  Genesis.  If  such  are  the  results  of  a 
single  discovery,  what  may  we  not  expect  when  the  buried 
libraries  of  Babylonia  have  been  more  fully  excavated,  and 
their  contents  copied  and  read  ?  j[t  j/t  Sayce. 


XIII 

THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  *.    BABYLONIAN 

The  men  of  Nineveh  shall  rise  in  judgment  with  this 
generation,  and  shall  condemn  it.  Matthew.  fA*  fl- 

To  the  outsider  it  would  appear  that  the  recent 
discoveries  in  Egypt  and  Babylonia  had  rendered 
untenable  many  of  the  grounds  on  which  the  critics 
had  founded  their  attacks  upon  the  authenticity  of 
the  Scriptures,  or,  at  least,  had  called  them  in  seri- 
ous question,  and  that  an  open  confession  of  that 
fact  might  be  reasonably  expected  from  them. 
But  therein  he  would  simply  display  his  lamentable 
ignorance  of  the  extent  of  their  resources,  and  of 
the  celerity  and  dexterity  with  which  the  critical 
camp  is  accustomed  from  time  to  time  to  shift  its 
grounds,  vociferously  proclaiming  the  while  that 
its  main  positions  are  in  nowise  affected.  Premise 
after  premise  they  abandon,  usually  preserving 
thereafter  a  dead  silence  as  to  the  fact  that  they 
ever  depended  on  them.  But  to  their  conclusions 
they  cling  tenaciously,  never  relinquishing  them, 
except  to  embrace  some  other  theory  still  more* 
radically  inimical  to  the  integrity  and  authority 
of  the  word  of  God.  It  is  impossible  for  them 
179 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

altogether  to  ignore  these  records  of  the  past  and 
the  witness  they  bear,  so  they  meet  them  by  en- 
deavoring to  evade  and  becloud  the  issues  which 
they  raise. 

One  critic  remarks  sapiently  and  complacently 
that  "  archaeologists  have  made  no  discoveries  which 
confirm  the  tradition  that  Moses  wrote  the  Penta- 
teuch.1 Did  he  imagine,  perhaps,  that  "tradition- 
alists "  were  waiting  in  daily  expectation  that  some 
industrious  digger  would  unearth  a  tablet  contain- 
ing a  receipted  bill  showing  how  many  shekels 
Moses  paid  to  the  scriveners  for  materials  and 
labor  in  transcribing  the  Pentateuch,  specifying 
the  number  of  folios  in  order  that  there  might  be 
no  doubt  that  the  documents  copied  correspond  in 
bulk  with  the  traditional  books  of  the  law  ? 

It  is  the  merest  commonplace  to  say  that  archaeo- 
logical discoveries  have  not  proved  that  Moses 
wrote  the  Pentateuch.  No  sane  man  ever  dreamed 
that  they  had  done  so.  But  they  have  exposed  the 
worthlessness  of  many  of  the  critical  reasons  for 
denying  the  possibility  of  the  origination  of  those 
writings  in  the  Mosaic  age.  They  have  shown 
history,  exact  and  circumstantial,  where  criticism 
has  seen  but  myth,  tradition,  and  fiction.  They 
have  confronted  with  the  "  camels  "  of  fact,  those 
evolved  by  the  Germanic  inner  consciousness. 
They  have  demonstrated  that  methods  of  "  codifi- 

1  Sinker,  "  Higher  Criticism,"  p.  27. 
180 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  :    BABYLONIAN 

cation "  which  the  critics  have  assigned  to  the 
post-exilic  period  as  peculiarly  characteristic  of  that 
age,  were  in  active  operation  in  the  days  of  Abra- 
ham. And  they  have  shown  generally  that  wher- 
ever points  of  contact  have  been  clearly  estab- 
lished between  these  relics  of  remote  antiquity 
and  the  Oracles  of  God,  it  has  been  but  to  add 
another  witness  to  the  fact  that  "  His  word  is  true 
from  the  beginning." 

In  the  recent  work  of  Professor  Sayce,  "  Monu- 
ment Facts  and  Higher  Critical  Fancies,"  that 
eminent  Assyriologist,  with  the  candor  and  impar- 
tiality which  have  always  marked  his  utterances, 
has  given  in  a  popular  and  compendious  form  some 
results  of  archaeological  research  so  far  as  they 
bear  upon  the  questions  under  consideration  ;  and 
those  who  esteem  valid  reasoning  upon  established 
fact  and  the  application  of  a  sound  scientific 
method  to  those  questions,  are  earnestly  com- 
mended to  that  little  book.  It  would  be  presump- 
tuous, as  well  as  superfluous,  to  add  to  what  has 
been  there  so  nobly  said  ;  and  that  phase  of  the 
subject  might  well  be  dismissed  with  this  reference, 
were  it  not  that  it  seems  proper  to  notice  some 
critical  comments  on  the  facts  with  which  Professor 
Sayce's  discussion  deals. 

He  shows,  for  instance,  that  the  age  of  Moses 
was  a  literary  age  ;  contrary  to  the  old-time  criti- 
cal contention  that  the  art  of  writing  was  then 
181 


THE   HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

unknown,  and  that  Moses,  consequently,  could  not 
have  written  the  books  ascribed  to  him. 

Doctor  Driver  in  his  "  Introduction  to  the  Lit- 
erature of  the  Old  Testament"  denies  present  de- 
pendence on  the  argument,  and  rather  unneces- 
sarily points  to  the  contents  of  that  volume  in  con- 
firmation of  his  assertion.1  Doctor  Smith  to  much 
the  same  effect  writes  :  "  Nor  do  any  of  the  argu- 
ments for  the  late  date  of  the  *  Hexateuch '  rest 
upon  a  reason  which,  even  if  it  were  probable,  is 
so  impossible  to  prove."  He  thinks,  however,  it 
would  be  unsafe  to  conclude  that  the  Israelites  of 
Moses'  time  knew  how  to  write.2 

Of  course,  they  do  not  now  rely  on  that  ground, 
and  they  are  quite  willing  to  have  it  forgotten  that 
they,  or  their  predecessors,  ever  did.  But  they 
certainly  cannot  deny  that  not  so  many  years 
since,  it  was  a  valuable  asset  in  the  stock  in  trade 
of  the  critical  copartnership.  Even  Wellhausen, 
to  whom  the  English  school  owe  substantially 
all  that  is  fundamental  and  distinctive  in  their 
scheme,  comes  very  near  to  a  statement  of  the 
argument  in  its  baldest  form.  On  this  very  point 
he  claims  distinctly  that  the  age  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha  was  a  non-literary  one,  and  that  although 
writing  had  been  practised  from  a  much  earlier 
period,  it  was  only  in  formal  instruments,  mainly 

1  "Introduction,"  etc.,  p.  158. 

2  "Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  p.  59  f. 

182 


THE  EXTERNAL  EVIDENCES  :  BABYLONIAN 

upon  stone.1  How  utterly  wide  of  the  mark  this 
is,  Professor  Sayce  has  conclusively  shown.  But 
the  English  critics,  according  to  custom,  while 
abandoning  Wellhausen's  premise,  hold  fast  to 
Wellhausen's  conclusions. 

In  any  event,  the  disclaimer  of  Doctors  Driver 
and  Smith  misses  entirely  the  point  raised  by  the 
establishment  of  the  literary  character  of  the 
Mosaic  age.  That  is,  the  inherent  absurdity  of 
the  assumption  that,  with  a  literary  atmosphere 
surrounding  him  on  all  sides,  and  with  literary 
activities  not  only  prevalent  among  the  higher 
classes,  but  permeating  every  grade  of  society  in 
the  land  of  his  birth  and  residence,2  a  man  equipped 
as  Moses  must  have  been  for  the  tremendous  task 
which  he  successfully  achieved,  should  not  have 
been  equal  to,  and  should  not  have  availed  himself 
of  the  opportunity  of  preserving  in  permanent 
form  by  written  records  for  the  future  guidance  of 
Israel,  the  elementary  constituents  of  the  origin 
and  history  of  a  divinely  called  people,  and  the 
laws  of  a  divinely  constituted  nation. 

Again,  it  will  be  remembered,  as  stated  in  an 
earlier  chapter,  that  Prof.  George  Adam  Smith 
says  :  "  It  is  on  the  presence  of  many  *  doublets  ' 

1  "Prolegomena"  p.  464  f.  See  also,  Schultz,  "Old  Testa- 
ment Theology,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  25  f. 

1  "  Monument  Facts,"  p.  31. 

183 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

in  the  '  Hexateuch  '  and  historical  books  that  the 
modern  criticism  of  the  Old  Testament  is  based."  l 
The  authors  of  these  doublets  or  two-fold  narra- 
tives of  the  same  event,  were  first  called  respect- 
ively the  Jehovist  and  Elohist,  and  were  repre- 
sented in  critical  works  by  the  symbols  J  and  E. 
But  latterly  a  custom  has  grown  up  of  dropping 
the  names  Jehovist  and  Elohist,  because  of  certain 
inconveniences  occasioned  by  their  use,  from  the 
critical  point  of  view,  and  of  substituting  therefor 
the  names  of  Judean  and  Ephraimite  writers  ;  thus 
while  the  original  distinction  on  which  "  the  mod- 
ern criticism  of  the  Old  Testament  is  based  "  has 
vanished,  the  critics  have  still,  in  the  new  titles, 
preserved  intact  the  sacrosanct  initials  J  and  E, 
which  they  frequently,  from  prudential  motives, 
join  together  thus,  JE. 

With  reference  to  these  doublets,  Prof.  Robert- 
son Smith  says  :  "  A  clear  case  is  the  account  of 
the  flood.  As  it  now  stands  the  narrative  has  the 
most  singular  repetitions,  and  things  come  in  in  the 
strangest  order.  But  as  soon  as  we  separate  the 
Jehovah  and  Elohim  documents  all  is  clear."  2 

Professor  Sayce  shows,  however,  that  in  the 
Babylonian  account  of  the  flood,  written  more 
than  two  thousand  years  before  the  advent  of  the 
hypothetical  J  and  E,  the  narrative  exhibits  the 

1  "Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  p.  33. 

2  "The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,"  p.  329. 

184 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  l    BABYLONIAN 

very  characteristics  relied  on  by  the  critics  to 
prove  the  composite  authorship  of  the  account  in 
Genesis.  So  these  ancient  Babylonians  too  had 
their  own  variety  of  J  and  E  to  pester  them.  It 
is  to  be  hoped  they  had  no  higher  critics  to  sepa- 
rate the  documents,  and  thus  spoil  their  enjoyment 
of  the  Epic  of  Gilgames. 

Now,  in  his  "  Modern  Criticism  and  the  Preach- 
ing of  the  Old  Testament,"  Prof.  G.  A.  Smith 
more  than  once  mentions  and  comments  on  this 
Babylonian  story  of  the  flood.1  And  it  is  odd,  to 
say  the  least,  that  he  should  be  silent  as  to  a 
peculiarity  which  was  so  manifest  and  so  significant 
to  Professor  Sayce.  That  it  should  have  escaped 
the  attention  of  so  careful  an  observer  is  unac- 
countable, for  it  is  not  a  mere  question  of  minor 
interest,  but  one  of  primary  importance ;  and,  as 
the  case  stands,  reduces  the  hypothesis  as  to  the 
divisibility  of  the  Genesis  documents,  so  far  as  that 
hypothesis  is  based  on  the  double  narrative  of  the 
flood,  to  a  palpable  absurdity.  At  least,  that  is 
the  impression  it  would  create  on  the  mind  of  the 
ordinary  man,  accustomed  to  deal  in  a  plain  and 
straightforward  manner  with  facts  as  they  come 
before  him,  and  alike  ignorant  and  contemptuous 
of  the  finespun  theories  of  speculative  scholarship. 

Another  bone  of  contention  has  been  the  bibli- 
cal account  of   Abram's  rescue   of    Lot  and  his 

1  "  Modern  Criticism,"  pp.  60  f.,  91  f. 

185 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

family  from  the  four  kings  under  the  leadership  of 
Chedorlaomer  of  Elam,  contained  in  the  fourteenth 
chapter  of  Genesis.  The  critics  have  been  unusu- 
ally severe  upon  this  chapter.  To  them  it  was 
utterly  without  foundation  in  fact ;  not  even  worthy 
of  inclusion  within  the  "  four  main  sources  "  of  the 
Pentateuch,  being,  as  Kuenen  says,  a  fragment  of 
a  post-exilian  midrash  of  Abram's  life,  of  very  recent 
date,  however  archaic  it  may  be  in  form.1  In  short, 
that  it  was  a  scrap  of  more  than  ordinarily  auda- 
cious fiction,  interjected  without  perceptible  reason 
into  the  legendary  life  of  a  man  who  was  a  myth 
anyway ;  and  that  its  incidents  were  "  sheer  im- 
possibilities which  gained  nothing  in  credibility 
from  the  fact  that  they  were  placed  in  a  world 
which  had  passed  away."  2 

Its  historic  setting  was  declared  to  be  incredible ; 
history  " knowing  nothing"  of  an  Elamite  suprem- 
acy in  Babylonia,  or  of  an  empire  on  the  Persian 
Gulf,  which  in  that  age  had  subject  provinces  so 
far  west  as  Syria.  Equally  preposterous  was  the 
idea  that  at  that  distant  date  a  military  expedition 
from  Babylonia  to  Canaan,  such  as  is  there  de- 
scribed, could  have  been  successfully  prosecuted. 
The  priest-king  Melchizedek  was  a  wholly  ficti- 
tious personage,  filling  an  equally  fictitious  office, 
created  for  the  purpose  of  glorifying  the  priest- 

1  Kuenen,  "The  Hexateuch,"  p.  324. 

2  Wellhausen,  "Composition  des  Hexateuch V'  P-  31** 

186 


THE   EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  :    BABYLONIAN 

hood  of  Jerusalem  and  to  justify  their  claiming 
tithes;1  while  the  name  of  the  city  itself  was  a 
gross  anachronism,  the  place  having  been  called 
Jebus  until  its  capture  by  David.  The  names  of 
the  actors  in  the  episode  even  were  not  genuine. 
Some  of  them  were  not  personal,  but  place-names.2 
According  to  Professor  Hommel,  "  a  distinguished 
Orientalist  long  ago  declared  this  chapter  to  be  a 
fantastic  grouping  together  of  names  which  either 
belonged  to  some  remote  period  or  were  expressly 
invented  for  the  occasion."  3 

If  anything  could  be  more  dogmatic  in  conclu- 
sion, or  more  categorical  in  statement  than  the 
various  items  of  the  "assured  results  of  criticism  " 
as  to  this  passage  of  ancient  history,  it  is  difficult 
to  see  what  form  those  conclusions  and  statements 
could  assume.  And  so  long  as  the  voice  of  the 
inscriptions  was  silent  and  their  messages  remained 
undeciphered  the  critics  held  the  position  triumph- 
antly against  all  comers.  But  archaeology  takes 
the  field,  and  a  more  ignominious  rout  of  subjective 
theory-building  at  the  hands  of  patient  gatherers 
of  facts  can  hardly  be  imagined. 

The  names  mentioned  in  Genesis  were  genuine, 
with  real  men  behind  them.  Amraphel  was  king 
of  Shinar,  Chedorlaomer  of  Elam,  Arioch  of  Larsa, 

1  Kuenen,  Op.  cit.,  same  page. 

2  Kuenen,  Ibid.,  p.  324. 

8  Hommel,  "Ancient  Hebrew  Tradition,"  p.  160. 
187 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

and  Tidal  of  nations,  or  nomad  hordes,  their 
reigns  synchronizing  with  the  life  of  the  patriarch 
Abraham.  The  Elamite  king  was  the  overlord  of 
the  others  at  that  precise  period,  holding  Canaan, 
the  land  of  the  Amorites,  as  a  subject  province. 
That  his  western  tributaries  did  rebel,  as  stated  in 
Genesis,  with  the  result  that  a  punitive  expedition 
was  projected  and  carried  into  effect  as  there  in- 
dicated, is  inherently  probable,  and  introduces  into 
Babylonian  history  an  episode  which,  as  Professor 
Hommel  says,  "  fits  into  the  political  circumstances 
of  the  period  like  a  missing  fragment,"1  throwing 
a  valuable  light  upon  the  knowledge  of  this  remote 
epoch  which  we  gather  from  the  cuneiform  records. 

In  pre-Mosaic  days  too,  the  royal  city  of  Judah 
was  known  as  Jerusalem,  or  Uru-salim,  i.  e.,  the 
city  of  Salem,  and  one  of  its  rulers  speaks  of  his 
tenure  of  office  in  terms  strongly  reminiscent  of 
the  references  to  Melchizedek  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews. 

The  story  of  these  discoveries  is  graphically 
told  by  Professor  Sayce  in  the  little  book  above 
mentioned. 2 

1  Hommel,  Op.  cit,  p.  192. 

2  Those  who  desire  a  more  detailed  account  with  the  evidence 
set  out  at  length  are  referred  to  the  same  author's  "  Higher  Criti- 
cism and  the  Monuments,"  Professor  Hommel's  "Ancient  He- 
brew Tradition  as  Illustrated  by  the  Monuments,"  Dr.  T.  G. 
Pinches'  "Old  Testament  in  the  Light  of  the  Historical  Records 
of  Assyria  and  Babylonia,"  and  Urquhart's  "Modern  Discov- 
eries and  the  Bible."     See  "New  Biblical  Guide,"  Vol.  II. 

188 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  '.    BABYLONIAN 

And  the  critics  ?  Oh,  they  are  doing  business 
at  the  old  stand,  vending  the  old  wares  with  but 
slightly  modified  cries,  serenely  oblivious  of  the 
fact  that  those  particular  wares  have  been  indelibly 
stamped  shoddy,  pinchbeck,  and  counterfeit. 

Wellhausen  sticks  to  what  he  said,  "  regardless," 
as  the  Westerner  would  elliptically  put  it.  He  is 
the  orchid  of  the  critical  flora,  and  can  live  on 
nothing,  "  hoist  in  the  air  by  his  own  waistband," 
to  adopt  the  exquisitely  elegant  metaphor  by  which 
he  characterizes  the  work  of  the  Chronicler. 

In  his  "  Introduction  "  Canon  Driver  dismisses 
this  chapter  in  six  lines,  with  the  mild  concession 
that  "  the  historical  improbabilities  of  the  narrative 
have  been  exaggerated,"  although  to  the  ordinary 
man  "demolished"  would  have  seemed  a  more  ap- 
propriate term.  He  admits  the  authentication  by 
the  monuments  of  the  names  of  the  four  kings, 
moving  them  a  few  centuries  further  into  the  past 
to  get  them  safely  out  of  Abraham's  way,  and 
comments  on  the  lack  of  monumental  corrobora- 
tion of  the  residue  of  the  narrative ; ■  thus  showing 
that,  however  high  his  professed  regard  for  the  Old 
Testament,  its  statements  must  receive  outside 
support  before  he  can  accept  them.  Ordinarily  the 
verification  of  the  historicity  of  a  coherent  account, 
in  so  far  as  the  discoverable  evidence  came  into 
contact  with  it,  would  raise  at  least  a  presumption 

1  Driver,  ''Introduction,"  etc.,  p.  15. 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

that  the  remainder  was  of  like  character.  Not 
so,  apparently,  in  the  mind  of  a  canon  of  the 
church  with  respect  to  the  word  of  God. 

Prof.  G.  A.  Smith  is  almost  as  summary  and 
much  more  peculiar  in  his  treatment  of  the  chap- 
ter. He  too  notes  the  lack  of  corroboration  ;  but 
he  considers  that  even  if  it  were  present  it  would 
not  better  the  case  for  the  truth  of  the  Bible.  For, 
on  the  strength  of  "  some  evidence,"  the  nature 
of  which  is  not  specified,  there  would  still  remain 
for  him  the  possibility  of  an  exilic  origin.  Of 
course,  when  one  avowedly  prefers  remote  possi- 
bilities to  confirmatory  proof,  contemporaneous  in 
character,  there  is  nothing  more  to  be  said. 

He  follows  with  a  statement  of  what  is  perhaps 
the  most  extraordinary  argument  to  be  found  in 
the  history  of  dialectics.  He  says,  "  In  any  case 
this  chapter  cannot  be  used  in  the  discussion  of 
the  critical  conclusions  as  to  the  date  of  the  four 
main  constituents  of  the  Hexateuch,  for  it  lies 
outside  them  all."1 

This  remarkable  plea  presents  strong  affinities 
to  the  device  of  the  thin  duelist  who,  when  his  fat 
opponent  complained  of  the  unfairness  of  the  con- 
test because  of  the  larger  surface  he  presented  as 
a  target,  suggested  that  his  shape  should  be  chalked 
upon  the  fat  man's  body,  and  that  all  shots  outside 
the  chalk  line  should  not  count. 

1  Smith,  ''Modern  Criticism,"  etc.,  p.  62. 
190 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  :    BABYLONIAN 

The  precise  question  at  issue  is  whether  the 
patriarchal  narrative  contained  in  the  book  of  Gene- 
sis is  history  or  myth.  As  it  stands  it  is  an  integer. 
It  has  so  stood  for  immemorial  ages.  Nor  is  there 
a  scrap  of  external  evidence  that  this  was  not  its 
original  form.  In  this  narrative  the  incident  under 
consideration  occupies  its  appropriate  place,  chron- 
ologically speaking,  in  the  account  of  the  life  of 
its  chief  actor,  Abraham.  Nor  is  there  the  slight- 
est appearance  of  any  incoherence  between  it  and 
the  rest  of  the  narrative,  or  of  its  having  been 
violently  thrust  therein  so  as  to  interrupt  its  or- 
derly course.  And  when  it  is  shown  that  contem- 
porary records  authenticate  it  in  substantial  par- 
ticulars, and  to  a  striking  degree  demonstrate  its 
fidelity  to  the  historical  surroundings  and  the 
political  situation  of  the  time,  it  seems  impossible 
to  deny  that  that  fact  has  a  most  important 
bearing  upon,  and,  so  far  as  it  goes,  tends  to  support 
the  claim  that  the  narrative  of  which  it  forms  a 
part  is  based  upon  trustworthy  documentary  evi- 
dence, and  not  upon  confused  and  discordant  tradi- 
tions reduced  to  writing  one  thousand  years  after- 
ward. And  the  contention  that  this  item  of  evidence 
may  be  stricken  from  the  record  and  its  probative 
force  nullified  because  the  critics  have  assumed 
that  the  Hexateuch  contains  "four  main  sources," 
and  that  it  belongs  to  none  of  them,  is  simply  be- 
wildering. They  may  assume  that  it  has  four 
191 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

sources  or  forty ;  but  that  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  question  of  the  competency  and  relevancy  of 
this  evidence  and  its  bearing  upon  the  historicity 
of  the  Abrahamic  biography.  Nor  would  such  an 
assumption  relieve  them  of  the  burden  of  answer- 
ing it  if  the  controversy  were  at  issue  in  any  other 
forum  than  one  in  which  agreement  with  a  theory 
is  regarded  as  demonstration  of  a  fact,  and  where 
hypotheses  are  accepted  as  the  equivalents  of  self- 
evident  truths. 


192 


XIV 

THE  EXTERNAL  EVIDENCES 
EGYPTIAN 


The  narrators  show  themselves  very  familiar  with  the  man- 
ners, the  customs,  and  the  ideas  of  the  Egyptians.  There 
is  not  a  single  detail  which  can  be  made  to  prove  the  con- 
trary. A  certain  number  of  descriptions  and  references 
are  astonishingly  faithful  and  striking. 

— August  Dillmann. 

The  history  of  Joseph,  even  in  its  smallest  details,  has 
painted  with  the  greatest  exactness  the  conditions  of  ancient 
Egypt-  —GeorgEbers. 

History  fixes  the  exodus  of  Israel  in  the  epoch  of  the 
Nineteenth  Dynasty,  and  geography  assigns  it  to  the  same 
date.  The  fact  admits  of  only  one  explanation.  The  story 
of  the  exodus  as  it  is  set  before  us  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment must  have  been  derived  from  contemporaneous  writ- 
ten documents,  and  must  describe  events  which  actually 
took  place.  It  is  no  fiction  or  myth,  no  legend  whose  only 
basis  is  folk  lore  and  unsubstantial  tradition,  but  history  in 
the  real  sense  of  the  word.  We  may  rest  assured,  « '  criti- 
cism" notwithstanding,  that  Israel  was  once  in  Egypt,  and 
that  the  narrative  of  its  flight  under  the  leadership  of  Moses 
is  founded  on  sober  fact.  ^.  H.  Sayce. 


XIV 

THE  EXTERNAL  EVIDENCES  I  EGYPTIAN 

In  that  day  shall  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt  speak  the 
language  of  Canaan.  Isaiah.  IV  ***• 

The  reliance  of  the  critics  upon  the  "  internal 
evidences "  furnished  by  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  as  the  basis  of  their  extraordinary 
conclusions  is  sought  to  be  justified  by  Doctor 
Driver  on  the  ground  that  no  external  evidence 
worthy  of  credit  exists  whereby  the  age  and 
authorship  of  those  books  may  be  determined. 1 
In  a  narrowly  technical  sense,  this  claim  is,  of 
course,  well  founded.  There  is  no  direct,  con- 
temporaneous testimony  from  the  outside  upon 
those  two  precise  points.  But  it  does  not  at  all 
follow  that  such  external  evidences  as  we  have  are 
not  germane  to  the  subject,  or  that  they  are  with- 
out value  in  helping  toward  a  correct  decision 
upon  those  questions,  and  may,  therefore,  be 
safely  ignored  as  negligible  factors  in  the  problem. 
While  they  may  not  affirmatively  support  the 
"  traditional "  view,  they  may  suffice  to  negative 
rather  forcibly  many  "  critical "  theories,  and  so, 

1  Driver,  "Introduction,"  p.  xl. 
195 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

although  not  proving  the  conservatives  in  the  right, 
be  potent  enough  to  put  the  critics  in  the  wrong. 

Thus,  to  take  one  of  the  instances  noted  in  the 
preceding  chapter,  the  claim  is  that  the  biblical 
account  of  the  flood  originally  consisted  of  two 
independent  narratives,  each  with  its  own  marked 
peculiarities,  one  written  in  the  Southern  kingdom 
by  the  Jehovist  during  the  ninth  century  b.  c,  and 
the  other  in  the  Northern  kingdom  by  the  Elo- 
hist  during  the  eighth  century,  which  two  ac- 
counts, peculiarities  and  all,  were  combined  into 
one  record  by  a  redactor  about  a  hundred  years 
later.1  The  Babylonian  inscriptions  show  that  a 
thousand  years  before  the  age  of  Moses  these 
two  elements,  the  Jehovistic  and  the  Elohistic, 
with  all  their  distinctive  features,  were  contained 
in  one  narrative,  viz.,  the  account  of  the  flood  in 
the  Chaldean  Epic  of  Gilgames.  So,  while  the 
external  evidence  did  not  establish  the  age  and 
authorship  of  the  Genesis  narrative,  it  effectually 
demolished  the  theory  of  the  critics  upon  that 
subject,  incidentally  throwing  discredit  to  that 
extent  upon  the  whole  scheme  of  the  composite 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch,  as  formulated,  dated, 
and  appraised  by  the  latest  school,  and  certified 
by  them  as  among  the  most  "  assured  results  of 
criticism." 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  external  evidences 

1  Sinker,  "  Higher  Criticism,"  p.  70  f. 
196 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  '.    EGYPTIAN 

drawn  from  ancient  Egyptian  sources  differ  in 
character  from  those  furnished  by  the  Babylonian 
inscriptions,  in  that  the  latter  contain  direct  refer- 
ences to  the  subject-matter  of  the  biblical  record 
which  are  absent  from  the  former.  But  the  Egyp- 
tian evidences  are  equally  valuable,  and  it  may  be 
said  equally  decisive,  in  redeeming  the  patriarchal 
and  Mosaic  narratives  from  the  charge  made  against 
them  by  the  critics  of  being  loose  and  uncertain 
traditions  only  partially  committed  to  writing  even 
in  the  days  of  the  divided  monarchy. 

The  course  of  modern  research  is  making  it 
increasingly  manifest  that  the  scriptural  account 
of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt,  from  the  captivity  of 
Joseph  to  the  exodus,  reproduces  the  Egyptian 
life  of  the  time  with  photographic  minuteness  and 
fidelity  without  an  anachronism  or  a  false  note. 
Forty  years  ago  Dr.  Georg  Ebers,  who  certainly 
cannot  be  accused  of  partiality  toward  the  "  tradi- 
tional view,"  in  the  preface  to  his  great  work, 
"Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,"  said  : 

I  offer,  so  to  say,  in  spite  of  myself  and  yet  voluntarily, 
to  those  who  wish  to  close  the  gates  against  free  criticism, 
many  things  which  will  be  agreeable  to  them,  for  I  show 
that  the  history  of  Joseph  in  particular,  even  to  its  smallest 
details,  has  painted  with  the  greatest  exactness  the 
conditions  of  ancient  Egypt. 

And  this  verdict  stands  unreversed.     All  that 
the  critics  even  have  attempted  to  do  on  this  head 
197 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

is  to  explain  away  its  necessary  corollaries.  In 
his  "  Life  and  Times  of  Joseph,"1  from  which 
work  the  foregoing  excerpt  is  quoted,  Mr.  John 
Urquhart  has  followed  the  history  of  Joseph 
step  by  step  with  scrupulous  and  painstaking 
care,  and  has  made  it  clear  that  not  only  in  its 
broader  aspects,  but  also  in  its  most  insignifi- 
cant incidents,  the  story  imports  such  intimate 
knowledge  of  Egypt  under  the  foreign  dominion 
of  the  Semitic  shepherd  kings,  and  the  corre- 
spondences between  it  and  the  known  facts  of  that 
epoch  are  so  numerous  and  precise  that  no  other 
conclusion  is  possible  than  that  it  is  a  historical 
document  of  the  first  class,  of  such  a  measure  of 
contemporaneity  as  to  enable  its  author  to  walk 
with  assured  step  through  the  pitfalls  and  ob- 
scurities of  that  remote  period  without  a  lapse  or 
an  error. 

The  atmosphere  of  the  story  is  Egyptian  ;  the 
social  structure  is  of  the  time  and  place ;  the 
usages  and  conditions  of  daily  life  quadrate  with 
the  facts  ;  the  political  situation  harmonizes  with 
the  showing  of  the  inscriptions  ;  the  requirements 
of  the  court  etiquette  of  the  period  are  correctly 
observed ;  official  titles  are  faithfully  transcribed 
and  the  specific  duties  attached  to  the  various  of- 
fices accurately  assigned ;  the  narrative  shows 
familiarity   with   current    phrases   and    forms   of 

1  "New  Biblical  Guide,"  Vols.  II.,  III. 
198 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  \    EGYPTIAN 

speech ;  purely  Egyptian  words  are  incorporated 
into  the  text,  needing  no  explanation  to  those  who 
had  been  dwellers  in  Egypt,  but  meaningless  to  all 
besides;  the  odd  inversion  in  Joseph's  question, 
"  Is  your  father  well  ?  Is  he  yet  alive  ?  "  (Gen.  43  : 
27)  is  found  paralleled  in  an  ancient  papyrus  deci- 
phered by  Chabas ;  undesigned  coincidences  un- 
obtrusively present  themselves,  and  there  are 
throughout  indications  that  the  dominant  race  was 
non-Egyptian,  and  that  the  dynasty  was  that  of 
the  Hyksos.  In  fine,  Urquhart  demonstrates  that 
every  ear-mark  of  historicity  is  present,  with  no 
hint  or  suggestion  to  the  contrary,  and  he  illus- 
trates and  fortifies  his  position  by  frequent  refer- 
ence to  and  quotation  from  the  works  of  Maspero, 
Lenormant,  Brugsch  Bey,  and  other  Egyptologists 
whose  authority  none  would  dispute. 

One  quotation  in  particular  from  Brugsch  may 
be  noted.  That  author  gives  an  inscription  from 
a  rock  tomb  which  he  assigns  to  the  times  imme- 
diately preceding  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  i.  e.,  the 
one  in  which  the  foreign  dominion  of  the  Hyksos 
was  overthrown  and  Egypt  restored  to  its  native 
kings.  The  tomb  was  that  of  an  official  named 
Baba,  the  servant  of  a  vassal  king  under  Apepi, 
the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph's  times. 

After  setting  forth  his  many  virtues,  Baba  says  : 
11 1  collected  the  harvest  as  a  friend  of  the  harvest 
god.  I  was  watchful  at  the  time  of  sowing.  And 
199 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

now,  when  a  famine  arose,  lasting  many  years,  1 
issued  out  corn  to  the  city  each  year  of  famine." 
Commenting  on  this,  Doctor  Brugsch  says  :  "  The 
only  just  conclusion  is  that  the  many  years  of 
famine  in  the  time  of  Baba  must  precisely  corre- 
spond with  the  seven  years  of  famine  under 
Joseph's  Pharaoh,  one  of  the  shepherd  kings."1 
And  to  the  truth  of  this  conclusion  high  proba- 
bility is  accorded  by  the  late  Reginald  Stuart  Poole, 
of  the  British  Museum,  in  his  article  "  Egypt "  in 
the  "  Encyclopaedia  Britannica." 

Now  it  is  idle  to  claim  that  an  account  which 
beyond  question  exhibits  the  characteristics  above 
indicated  is  myth  or  folk  lore  containing  only  "  a 
substratum  of  actual  personal  history"  or  oral  tradi- 
tion a  millennium  old  before  its  reduction  to  writ- 
ing. Doubly  so  is  it  when  we  are  asked  to  regard 
it  as  mere  patchwork  tradition  constructed  on  the 
instalment  plan,  with  centuries  between  the  various 
patches,  and  the  whole  subjected  to  the  periodic 
onslaughts  of  an  interminable  succession  of  redac- 
tors. If  it  is  not  history,  entitled  to  an  honorable 
status  and  to  sober  credence  as  such,  then  that 
term  can  never  be  applied  to  any  of  the  records 
of  antiquity,  and  the  entire  history  of  the  ancient 
world  must  remain  for  all  time  in  remediless 
obscurity  and  confusion. 

If  this  were  an  isolated  question,  uncomplicated 

1  Brugsch,  "Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  261  f. 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  I    EGYPTIAN 

by  the  necessities  of  the  place  assigned  to  this 
document  in  the  general  critical  scheme,  it  is  safe 
to  say  that  the  critics  would  never  have  been  con- 
cerned to  impeach  its  authenticity.  But  the  system 
demands  that  its  value  as  evidence  must  be  im- 
paired ;  so,  as  it  is  impossible  for  them  either  to 
deny  or  to  ignore  the  facts,  it  becomes  necessary 
that  they  should  resort  to  the  favorite  legal  device 
of  "confession  and  avoidance,"  thereby  enabling 
them  to  admit  the  facts  and  yet  "  save  the  face  " 
of  the  theory. 

Wellhausen,  referring  to  these  narratives  in  gen- 
eral, admits  that  "  many  of  them  have  a  local  color, 
which  bespeaks  a  local  origin." '  There  is  an  oracu- 
lar profundity  about  this  utterance  worthy  of  the 
immortal  Captain  Bunsby  himself.  It  may  be  safely 
left  to  speak  for  itself.  It  is  probably  unanswer- 
able. Certainly,  while  it  does  the  "  traditionalist  " 
contention  no  good,  it  can  do  the  critical  theory  no 
harm  ;  which  is  a  prime  virtue  in  an  admission. 

On  this  subject  at  large,  though  not  with  special 
reference  to  the  Genesis  narratives,  Doctor  Driver 
says,  "  The  biblical  records  possess  exactly  that  de- 
gree of  historical  and  topographical  accuracy  which 
would  be  expected  from  the  circumstances  under 
which  all  reasonable  critics  hold  that  they  were 
composed."2     Which,  in  turn,  is  just  about  what 

1  "Prolegomena"  p.  327. 
1  "Introduction,"  Pref.,  p.  xi. 
201 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

might  have  been  expected  from  Doctor  Driver — 
namely,  a  supercilious  reliance  upon  the  great  name 
to  which  his  profound  erudition  and  undoubted 
critical  acumen  have  justly  entitled  him  as  his 
justification  for  a  dismissal  of  the  whole  subject 
with  his  mere  ipse  dixit ;  and  if  the  common  peo- 
ple are  not  satisfied  they  ought  to  be. 

Professor  Smith  does  condescend  to  go  into  the 
question  somewhat  more  in  detail.     He  says : 

The  portrait  of  Egyptian  life  presented  by  the  story  of 
Joseph  in  the  Jahwist-Elohist  document  has  been  appealed 
to,  as  proof  that  the  writer  lived  at  a  time  when  Israel,  from 
their  long  residence  in  Goshen  were  still  familiar  with 
Egypt.  .  .  But  the  life  which  the  story  of  Joseph  portrays 
was  the  life  of  Egypt  not  only  in  Joseph's  time.  In  the 
same  molds  it  persisted  for  centuries  after  the  exodus.  * 

An  explanation  this,  which  has  about  as  many  ele- 
ments of  probability  in  it  as  that  of  the  burglar 
who,  when  detected  rifling  a  safe  in  a  house  into 
which  he  had  broken,  explained  that  he  was  there 
looking  for  a  lost  family  cat.  The  seventeenth 
dynasty,  to  which  by  general  agreement  Joseph's 
Pharaoh  belonged,  is  placed,  approximately,  in  the 
eighteenth  century  b.  c.  The  earliest  (Jehovist) 
account  of  Joseph's  life  is  assigned  to  the  ninth 
century  b.  c.  And  the  claim  that  an  "accurate 
and  vivid  description  "  of  Egyptian  life  at  the  later 

1  "  Modern  Criticism,"  p.  63. 
202 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  :    EGYPTIAN 

date  would  present  an  equally  faithful  representa 
tion  of  the  conditions  existing  nine  hundred  years 
earlier  is  one  which,  to  say  the  least,  is  calculated 
to  make  rather  heavy  draughts  upon  human  cre- 
dulity. The  early  epoch  was  one  of  Egyptian  sub- 
jection to  an  alien  usurpation — a  fact  which  of 
itself  would  raise  a  presumption  that  the  conti- 
nuity of  Egyptian  life  and  usage  would  be  thereby 
broken  and  features  introduced  which  would  serve 
to  differentiate  it,  notwithstanding  general  resem- 
blances, from  subsequent  periods  under  native 
kings.  The  immobility  of  the  "  unchanging  East  " 
is  proverbial ;  but  that  characteristic  would  hardly 
warrant  the  assumption  that  near  a  thousand  years 
could  pass  away  leaving  no  trace  of  its  flight  in 
the  habits  and  customs  of  the  people  and  no  marks 
to  distinguish  its  beginning  from  its  close. 

The  facts,  moreover,  are  against  the  claim. 
Canon  Rawlinson  conclusively  shows  that,  instead 
of  the  life  of  Joseph's  time  persisting  in  the  same 
molds  for  centuries  after  the  exodus,  the  direct 
contrary  is  the  fact  j1  and  that  while  such  a  state- 
ment might  have  been  justly  made  as  to  earlier 
epochs  of  Egyptian  history,  vast  changes  with  far- 
reaching  effects  were  already  in  operation  during 
the  eighteenth  dynasty,  long  before  the  exodus. 

He  says  : 

1  See  also  R.  S.  Poole,  quoted  by  Urquhart,  in  "The  Bible, 
its  Structure  and  Purpose,"  Vol.  I.,  pp.  247  f. 

203 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

The  strength  of  Egypt  had  from  the  first  consisted  in  its 
isolation  and  its  unity.  For  centuries  upon  centuries  the 
policy  of  isolation  was  maintained — foreign  manners,  for- 
eign ideas,  foreign  gods,  were  either  unheard  of  or  studiously 
ignored.  But  with  the  accession  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty 
all  this  was  changed. 

Foreign  wars  carried  the  Egyptian  arms  deep  into 
Asia  ;  foreign  commerce  was  encouraged ;  foreign 
prisoners  were  brought  into  the  country ;  foreign 
mercenaries  were  employed  ;  the  "  gilded  youth  " 
of  the  upper  circles  took  to  foreign  travel. 

As  a  natural  result  foreign  manners  crept  in,  the  language 
was  corrupted  by  a  large  admixture  of  Semitic  words,  the 
Pantheon  was  invaded  by  a  host  of  Semitic  or  Scythic  dei- 
ties, and  the  old  national  exclusive  spirit,  sapped  and  weak- 
ened by  these  various  influences,  decayed  and  died  away. 1 

In  the  nineteenth  dynasty  too,  while  art  and  lit- 
erature flourished  to  an  unprecedented  degree,  the 
morals  of  the  people  underwent  a  decided  change 
for  the  worse.  The  evils  of  over-taxation  were 
aggravated ;  unusual  and  inhuman  punishments 
were  inflicted ;  men  and  women  were  stripped 
naked  and  subjected  to  the  pain  and  indignity  of 
the  bastinado  ;  cruel  customs  prevailed  in  war ; 
captives  were  slain  and  mutilated : 

Polygamy  on  a  vast  scale  was  introduced  into  the  royal 
household  ;  indecency  in   apparel  was  common  ;  and   the 

1  Rawlinson,  "  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  208. 
204 


THE    EXTERNAL    EVIDENCES  \    EGYPTIAN 

profligacy  of  the  women  was  such  as  to  become  a  common- 
place of  Egyptian  novels.  Altogether,  it  would  seem  that 
the  acme  of  perfection  in  art  was  coincident  with  a  decline 
in  morals — a  decline  which  combined  increased  savagery 
with  advancing  sensualism. ■ 

Later  dynasties  witnessed  still  more  radical, 
even  revolutionary  changes,  augmented  in  volume 
and  accelerated  in  movement,  invading  every  de- 
partment of  national  life,  until  in  the  period  to 
which  the  composition  of  the  Genesis  narratives 
is  attributed,  Egypt  was  but  a  shadow  of  its  former 
self.  And  yet  we  are  asked  to  believe  that  an  ac- 
count portraying  Egyptian  life  in  that  decadent 
age  would  fit  equally  well  the  conditions  existing 
centuries  before ! 

Professor  Smith  further  says  that  "under  the 
monarchy  Israel  had  many  opportunities  of  becom- 
ing acquainted  with  it."  The  picture  which  this 
suggests  of  those  early  "historical  novelists"  sev- 
erally making  trips  to  Egypt  in  the  ninth  and 
eighth  centuries  respectively  to  "imbibe  local 
color  "  to  enable  them  to  verify  and  touch  up  the 
details  of  their  story  is  an  engaging  one ;  but  it 
appeals  more  forcibly  to  the  imagination  than  to 
the  reason. 

He  further  finds  indications  of  late  origin  in 
some  of  the  names  given  in  Genesis.  Here  again 
he  and   Canon  Rawlinson  are  at  direct  variance. 

1  Rawlinson,  "  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  194. 
205 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

For  the  latter  says  distinctly  that  the  Egyptian 
words  and  names  connected  with  the  history  point 
to  the  times  of  the  Hyksos,  citing  Brugsch  Bey  in 
support  of  this  view. l  To  the  same  effect  writes 
Doctor  Souttar  in  his  recent  work.2 

The  contention  of  Professor  Smith  is  that  "  the 
Egyptian  names  Zaphnath-Paaneah,  Potipherah, 
and  Asenath  belong  to  types  of  names  which  do 
not  appear  or  are  not  frequent  on  the  Egyptian 
monuments  until  some  centuries  after  the  exo- 
dus." Now,  in  the  name  of  candor  and  common 
fairness,  which  does  he  mean  ?  Never  ?  or,  hardly 
ever  ?  If  the  latter,  why  confuse  the  issue  by  the 
interjection  of  a  misleading  alternative  ? 

It  would,  in  any  event,  be  interesting  to  know 
how  many  men  with  such  names  as  "  Praise-God 
Barebones"  and  "  Fight-the-good-fight-of -faith  Pet- 
tengill  "  would  have  to  be  mentioned  in  the  history 
of  Cromwellian  times  before  he  would  be  con- 
vinced that  names  of  that  kind  were  known  and 
used  in  the  seventeenth  century.  One  well  au- 
thenticated example  might  suffice  a  disinterested 
man.  One  hundred  would  be  too  few  to  satisfy 
one  who,  for  other  causes,  was  bent  on  maintaining 
a  contrary  view. 

1  Brugsch,  "  History  of  Egypt,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  265. 

2  Robinson  Souttar,  "Short  History  of  Ancient  Peoples," 
p.  197. 

206 


XV 

THE   QUESTION    OF   MORALS 


There  is  no  instance  of  an  elaborate  historical  and  legis- 
lative work  having  been  composed  with  the  object  of  con- 
fusing, if  not  perverting,  a  nation's  traditions  of  its  own 
history  and  its  ancient  laws  ;  still  less  of  such  a  work  suc- 
ceeding in  the  attempt. 

Most  incredible,  if  not  most  monstrous  of  all  is  the  sup- 
position that  such  a  pious  fraud  was  committed  at  the  insti- 
gation of  the  God  of  truth,  and  that  the  books  which  are  its 
record  and  its  instrument  can  be  regarded  as  inspired  by  him. 

— Henry  Wace. 


I  have  seen  in  the  writings  of  men  of  less  eminence  in 
criticism  than  Doctor  Driver  such  a  smug  sentence  as  this  : 
4 '  The  charge  of  forgery  will  not  be  entertained  by  those  of 
us  who  are  acquainted  with  the  literary  customs  of  the  East. ' ' 
This  naive  self-complacency  and  easy  assumption  of  pecu- 
liar and  exclusive  acquaintance  with  Oriental  literary  cus- 
tom must  not,  of  course,  be  taken  seriously  by  any  one  who 
desires  to  deal  with  these  matters  in  a  genuinely  critical 
spirit.  These  gentlemen  know  no  more  about  Oriental 
usages  than  other  people,  and  they  cannot  be  allowed  to 
intermingle  their  personal  preconceptions  with  the  rigid  pro- 
cesses of  criticism.  Neither  Doctor  Driver  nor  any  one 
else  has  any  adequate  means  of  becoming  acquainted  with 
the  literary  usages  and  moral  ideas  of  the  time  when  the 
Pentateuch  was  written  except  by  an  unbiased  investigation 
of  the  Pentateuchal  writings  themselves. 

—John  Thomas. 


XV 

THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 

Do  men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of  thistles  ? 

—Matthew.  7: /£ 

It  is  pertinent  at  this  point  to  inquire  what  place 
the  Old  Testament  as  reconstructed  by  the  critics 
is  to  occupy  in  the  Christian  scheme  of  things. 
Up  to  recent  times,  the  general  consensus  of 
Christian  belief  was  that  the  two  Testaments  were 
indissolubly  joined,  and  that  together  they  formed 
one  body  of  revelation,  interdependent  throughout, 
and  informed  by  a  unity  of  spirit  and  purpose 
which  gave  assurance  that  one  divine  life  moved  in 
and  through  and  vitalized  the  whole.  And  while 
it  was  fully  recognized  that  the  older  order  was 
provisional  and  incomplete  in  character  and  con- 
tent, and  that  its  design  was  largely  educational, 
being  our  schoolmaster  to  bring  us  to  Christ,  yet 
his  coming  was  not  regarded  as  abolishing  or 
superseding  it  as  an  integral  element  in  the  revela- 
tion of  God  to  men,  of  which  our  Lord  and  Sav- 
iour was  the  final  Word.  He  came  not  to  destroy, 
but  to  fulfill.  And  the  inspired  record  of  the 
initial  and  preparatory  stages  in  the  unfolding  of 
o  209 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

the  divine  purposes  lost  no  whit  of  its  value  or  its 
authority  by  the  appearance  of  Him  who  was  the 
sum  and  substance  of  its  every  message.  On  the 
contrary,  its  meaning  was  thereby  enriched  and 
expanded,  its  truths  illumined  and  its  problems 
solved,  while  its  abiding  authority  was  confirmed 
once  for  all  by  the  seal  of  his  express  sanction  and 
approval.  It  was,  and  had  been  from  time  imme- 
morial, accepted  and  reverenced  as  the  divinely 
laid  foundation  upon  which  the  Christian  edifice 
was  builded. 

If  the  critical  estimate  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
to  prevail,  can  it  any  longer  hold  this,  or  any  hon- 
orable position  in  the  Christian  system  ?  Can  it 
be  anything  other  than  a  source  of  weakness,  cast- 
ing doubt  upon  the  evidence  of  the  divine  origin 
of  the  Christian  revelation,  which  evidence  rested, 
in  part  at  least,  upon  its  fulfillment  of  the  types 
and  prophecies  of  the  older  Scriptures  ?  Would 
not  the  mere  instinct  of  self-preservation  prompt 
the  complete  severance  of  the  Old  from  the  New, 
so  that  the  latter  might  stand  on  its  own  merits, 
unembarrassed  by  any  vital  connection  with  the 
fallible  nature,  the  impaired  authority,  and  the 
unfounded  claims  of  the  earlier  record  ? 

This  severance  is  not,  perhaps,  imminent ;  but 
it  is  approaching.  As  it  is,  the  only  idea  of  con- 
tinuity involved  in  the  critical  concept  seems  to  be 
that  Christianity  is  an  after-growth  sprouting  from 
210 


THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 


the  decayed  stump  of  Judaism,  rather  than  that 
both  law  and  gospel  are,  from  Sinai  to  Bethany, 
one  growth  of  one  stem  from  one  root,  a  tree  of 
God's  own  right  hand  planting,  the  leaves  whereof 
are  for  the  healing  of  the  nations.  But  this  latter 
view  is  one  which,  the  critics  tell  us,  is  no  longer 
"  tenable  in  our  days."  l 

And  no  wonder.  If  the  Old  Testament  is  what 
they  say  it  is  ;  compiled  as  they  say  it  was  ;  written 
when  and  under  the  circumstances  claimed  by 
them,  with  the  motives  they  attribute  to  its  writers  ; 
then,  the  sooner  it  is  decanonized  and  forgotten, 
the  better. 

If  it  were  merely  a  matter  of  the  perpetuation 
of  honest  tradition,  however  unverifiable  or  mis- 
taken it  might  be ;  if  the  various  provisions  of  the 
legislation  were  truly  assigned  to  the  period  and 
source  of  their  enactment,  or  left  unassigned  and 
so  stated  ;  if  the  history  consisted  of  bare  histori- 
cal notes,  fragmentary  and  incomplete,  but  faith- 
fully transcribed  from  authentic  materials ;  and  if 
the  prophetic  oracles,  anonymous  or  of  known 
authorship,  were  simply  collected  and  preserved 
without  alteration,  addition,  or  annexation,  however 
chaotic  they  might  be  as  to  form  or  arrangement, 
the  case  would  be  vastly  better  than  that  made  by 
the  critics'  showing.  Although  even  then  the  re- 
sulting record  would  be  an  insecure  foundation 

■  Kuenen,  "  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  I.,  p.  8. 

211 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

upon  which  to  base  a  system  claiming  to  be  of 
divine  appointment.  But  when  to  all  this  uncer- 
tainty the  element  of  designed  deception  is  added, 
the  case  becomes  desperate  indeed.  The  inevitable 
outcome  of  the  critical  process  is  : 

i.  That  the  record  throughout  is  a  deliberate 
and  corrupt  falsification  of  history,  so  that  no  man 
can  take  it  upon  its  prima  facie  showing  without 
being  grossly  misled. 

2.  That  the  documentary  evidence,  where  it  has 
not  been  manufactured  entire,  has  been  subjected 
from  time  to  time  to  interpolation  and  manipulation 
in  the  interests  of  succeeding  sets  of  schemes  and 
schemers. 

3.  That  the  whole  body  of  the  nation's  legisla- 
tion, social,  economic,  and  religious,  is  falsely  at- 
tributed to  Moses,  who  is  further  made  to  commit 
the  blasphemy  of  asserting  that  it  is  a  direct  rev- 
elation from  God,  thus  involving  the  Almighty 
himself  as  a  party  to  the  fraud. 

4.  That  this  fraud  was  carefully  and  deliberately 
worked  out  by  the  clique  to  whom  its  benefits  and 
emoluments  were  to  enure,  conferring  upon  them 
the  glory  of  descent  from  a  man  who  never  ex- 
isted, with  the  right  of  hereditary  succession  to  an 
office  he  never  held,  and  clothing  them  with  author- 
ity to  lay  upon  the  people  oppressive  imposts  and 
obligations  never  before  heard  of. 

Granting  the  critical  premises,  it  would  appear 
212 


THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 


to  be  a  hopeless  undertaking  successfully  to  defend 
the  Deuteronomic  and  priestly  writers  and  redac- 
tors from  the  charge  of  conscious,  intentional,  and 
corrupt  fraud  in  foisting  upon  the  people  sham 
Mosaic  legislation  to  their  own  advantage,  and  in 
perverting  the  facts  of  the  history  so  as  to  furnish  a 
plausible  background  and  to  give  an  air  of  credible 
antiquity  to  their  revolutionary  innovations. 

This  question  presents  no  embarrassing  features 
to  the  German  critics  of  the  Wellhausen  school. 
They  content  themselves  with  setting  forth  the 
methods  of  the  biblical  writers  mentioned,  without 
making  any  attempt  to  justify  or  extenuate  them,  or 
to  relieve  them  of  any  odium  which  might  possibly 
attach  to  such  practices.  For  they  are  not  con- 
cerned to  find  evidences  of  inspiration  or  any  divine 
element  at  all  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures. 

It  is  far  otherwise  with  the  "  Christian  scholars  " 
in  whose  hands  criticism  "  does  not  banish  or  de- 
stroy the  inspiration "  of  that  book,  but  rather 
" presupposes  it."1  For,  although  they  are  at 
agreement  with  their  German  brethren  upon  all 
points  of  cardinal  importance  involved  in  this  phase 
of  the  critical  theories,  they  shrink  from  applying 
the  only  logical  conclusion  possible  in  the  premises. 
If  the  conduct  of  these  biblical  writers  is  as  stated 
by  both  English  and  German  critics,  it  richly  de- 
serves all  the  scorn  and  contumely  which  the  latter 

1  Driver,  "Introduction,"  etc.,  p.  xiii. 
213 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

have  heaped  upon  it.  But  the  "  Christian  scholars  " 
at  least  perceive  the  enormity  of  attributing  to  the 
Holy  One  of  Israel  the  employment  of  such  vicious 
media  in  the  revelation  of  his  truth  to  men.  They, 
therefore,  seek  strenuously  to  evade  the  issue  of 
moral  obliquity  which  is  inevitably  raised.  And 
they  advance  pleas  in  extenuation  and  justification 
which,  in  their  way,  are  as  extraordinary  as  the 
original  charges  which  render  them  necessary. 

So,  while  Wellhausen  contemptuously  refers  to 
the  Chronicles  as  "a  tainted  whole,"1  Doctor 
Driver,  at  one  with  him  in  his  estimate  of  the 
book,  deprecates  the  idea  that  it  was  "  the  Chron- 
icler's intention  to  pervert  the  history."2  Nowa- 
days, a  man  is  presumed  to  intend  the  consequences 
of  his  acts — a  presumption  which  is  not  only  good 
law  but  good  sense.  Why  it  should  have  been 
otherwise  in  the  Chronicler's  times  is  not  apparent. 

Wellhausen,  again,  speaking  of  the  Pentateuch 
as  completed  by  the  addition  of  the  priestly  code, 
describes  the  cautious  Ezra  as  withholding  its  pro- 
mulgation until  the  coming  of  an  opportune  time 
for  the  introduction  of  its  radical  innovations, 
which  did  not  occur  until  fourteen  years  after  his 
return  to  Jerusalem.3  Driver,  on  the  other  hand, 
virtually  denies  that  they  were  innovations,  or  that 

1  "Prolegomena"  p.  224. 

2  Driver,  "Introduction,"  p.  533. 

3  " Prolegomena"  etc.,  p.  406. 

214 


THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 


the  priestly  code  was  "manufactured"  by  the 
priests  during  the  exile.1  This  statement  is  hard 
to  reconcile  with  one  made  by  him  a  few  pages 
earlier,  where  he  says,  p.  136:  "The  pre-exilic 
period  shows  no  indications  of  the  legislation  of 
that  code  as  being  in  operation."  This  creates  an 
odd  quandary.  The  priestly  code  was  not  in 
operation  before  the  exile,  presumably,  therefore, 
not  in  existence.  It  was  not  manufactured  during 
the  exile.  It  appears  full-fledged  and  complete 
immediately  after  the  exile.  Where,  when,  and 
how  did  it  originate  ?  The  only  alternative  left 
open  is  manifestly  that  of  spontaneous  generation. 

The  explanation  attempted  by  Doctor  Driver 
does  not  better  the  case,  but  rather  accentuates 
the  contradiction.  Rebutting  the  imputation  of 
"  manufacture,"  he  says  at  page  143  that  in  its 
main  stock  "  it  is  based  upon  pre-existing  temple 
usage."  If  this  means  anything  it  means  that  the 
substance  of  the  legislation  was  in  operation  in 
the  pre-exilic  period.  Which  statement  does  he 
desire  his  readers  to  accept,  that  on  page  136  or 
that  on  page  143  ?     They  cannot  both  be  true. 

It  is  not  easy  to  differentiate  this  treatment 
from  mere  literary  thimblerigging.  The  evident 
design  is  to  uphold  the  critical  hypothesis  of  the 
Babylonian  origin  of  the  "  priestly  code,"  and  at 
the   same  time   relieve   the   captive   scribes   from 

1  "Introduction,"  p.  143. 

«5 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

the  odium  of  having  there  "  manufactured"  it. 
How,  upon  that  hypothesis,  the  regulations  as  to 
the  wilderness  sojourn,  the  directions  as  to  the 
tabernacle,  its  furnishings  and  service  and  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Aaronic  order  can  be  anything 
else  than  a  fictitious  creation  of  the  exile,  without 
a  shadow  of  fact  behind  it,  passes  comprehension. 
Doctor  Driver  seeks  to  palliate  the  "  free 
handling "  of  materials  attributed  to  the  biblical 
writers  by  invoking  a  so-called  principle  of  inter- 
pretation to  the  effect  that  "  some  freedom  was 
used  by  ancient  historians  in  placing  speeches  or 
discourses  in  the  mouths  of  historical  characters."  l 
Kuenen,  elaborating  the  same  idea,  says  that  "it 
may  now  be  accepted  as  proved  that  the  discourses 
and  laws  of  Deuteronomy  were  put  in  the  mouth  of 
Moses  "  by  an  author  of  the  seventh  century  who 
"  has  made  Moses  himself  proclaim  that  which  in 
his  opinion  it  was  expedient "  should  be  then  an- 
nounced and  introduced.  And  he  adds  :  "At  a 
time  when  notions  about  literary  property  were  yet 
in  their  infancy,  an  action  of  this  kind  was  not 
regarded  as  at  all  unlawful.  Men  used  to  perpe- 
trate such  fictions  as  these  without  any  qualms  of 
conscience";2  an  excursus  in  casuistry  which  it 
would  be  hard  to  parallel,  that  is,  if  it  is  intended 
as  a  defense  of  the  morality  of  the  Deuteronomic 

1  "Introd.  Pref.,"  p.  xi.,  note. 

2  "  Religion  of  Israel,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  18  f. 

216 


THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 


author's  action.  In  like  manner  it  might  be  said 
that  at  a  time  when  Thuggee  still  flourished  in 
Hindustan  the  worshipers  of  the  goddess  Kali  did 
not  regard  the  wholesale  strangling  of  victims  as 
at  all  unlawful,  and  were  used  to  perpetrate  such 
murders  without  any  qualms  of  conscience.  How- 
ever adequate  this  might  be  as  an  explanation  of 
their  attitude,  it  would  certainly  leave  much  to  be 
desired  as  a  justification  of  their  morality. 

Some  critics  along  the  same  lines  point  to  the 
alleged  impersonation  of  Solomon  by  the  author  of 
Ecclesiastes,  and  to  the  practice  followed  by  Plu- 
tarch and  others  of  putting  speeches  into  the 
mouths  of  their  characters  as  evidence  of  the  uni- 
versal prevalence  and  the  innocent  intent  of  such  a 
custom.  But  this  is  the  veriest  pretense  at  insti- 
tuting a  valid  parallel.  The  cases  are  not  even 
similar,  much  less  analogous.  To  make  the  par- 
allel at  all  warrantable  these  ancient  historians 
would  have  to  put  into  the  mouths  of  their  heroes 
not  only  speeches,  but  the  promulgation  of  positive 
legislation  whose  charges  and  burdens  it  was  their 
purpose  to  lay  upon  their  countrymen,  and  of  the 
avails  of  which  they  were  themselves  to  be  the 
beneficiaries. 

The  biblical  writers,  moreover,  are  charged  with 

attributing  utterances  not  only  to  Moses  and  others, 

but  also   to   the   Almighty  himself.       Surely  the 

critics  in  their  attempts   at  justification  draw  the 

217 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

line  at  that  ?  Apparently  not.  The  practice,  it  is 
true,  was  not  unknown  in  biblical  times,  but  the 
ancient  prophets  were  much  more  severe  in  their 
estimate  of  its  moral  quality  and  consequences  than 
are  the  modern  critics.    The  prophet  Ezekiel  says  : 

They  have  seen  vanity  and  lying  divination,  saying,  The 
Lord  saith :  and  the  Lord  hath  not  sent  them ;  and  they  have 
made  others  to  hope  that  they  would  confirm  the  word. 
Have  ye  not  seen  a  vain  vision,  and  have  ye  not  spoken  a 
lying  divination,  whereas  ye  say,  The  Lord  saith  it;  albeit  I 
have  not  spoken  ?  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  God, 
Because  ye  have  spoken  vanity,  and  seen  lies,  therefore,  be- 
hold, I  am  against  you,  saith  the  Lord  God.  And  mine 
hand  shall  be  upon  the  prophets  that  see  vanity,  and  that 
divine  lies :  they  shall  not  be  in  the  assembly  of  my  people, 
neither  shall  they  be  written  in  the  writing  of  the  house  of 
Israel,  neither  shall  they  enter  into  the  land  of  Israel;  and 
ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the  Lord  God  (Ezek.  13  : 6-9). 

Which  estimate  does  the  Christian  prefer,  that  of 
the  Hebrew  prophet  or  that  of  the  higher  critic  ? 

Even  if  it  were  proven  that  such  loose  methods 
obtained  and  were  universally  followed  in  the 
ancient  world,  so  that  each  writer  regarded  himself 
as  having  plenary  license  to  change,  augment,  or 
diminish  the  biblical  records  at  will  to  suit  present 
purposes,  which  license  he  freely  exercised,  it  is 
not  seen  how  that  would  better  the  quality  of  the 
records  themselves.  It  might  acquit  him  of  a 
consciously  evil  intent ;  it  must  leave  the  writings 
ineradicably  tainted  with  their  original  spuriousness 
218 


THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 


and  falsity  and  therefore  impossible  as  a  revelation 
of  divine  truth. 

The  indications  are,  however,  that  the  evidence 
of  the  prevalence  of  this  low  standard  of  literary 
morality  exists  only  in  the  necessities  of  the  critical 
theory.  The  author  of  Deuteronomy,  at  any  rate, 
will  have  none  of  it,  nor  will  he  tolerate  the 
thought  that  his  words  are  to  be  at  the  mercy  of 
every  redactor  whose  "tendency"  requires  their 
modification  or  annulment.  His  strict  and  reiterated 
injunction  is :  "  Ye  shall  not  add  unto  the  word 
which  I  command  you,  neither  shall  ye  diminish 
aught  from  it,  that  ye  may  keep  the  command- 
ments of  the  Lord  your  God  which  I  command 
you  "  (Deut.  4  :  2).  If  the  critics  are  right  as  to 
the  Deuteronomist's  tampering  with  the  earlier 
records,  he  must  have  been  a  singularly  constituted 
person  to  imagine  that  the  measure  he  had  meted 
to  his  predecessors  would  not  in  turn  be  meted  to 
him  by  those  who  followed  after. 

At  a  much  earlier  period  too,  it  appears  that 
"notions  about  literary  property"  were  by  no 
means  so  inchoate  as  the  critics  represent.  In  the 
ancient  code  of  Hammurabi  that  famous  legislator 
concludes  his  work  by  calling  down  the  condign 
vengeance  of  nineteen  different  gods  and  goddesses 
and  groups  of  gods  and  goddesses  on  any  one  who 
shall  "  change  his  word,  alter  his  bas-relief,  destroy 
his  written  name  and  write  his  own  name  thereon, 
219 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

or  cause  another  to  do  so."  l  The  rights  of  author- 
ship under  modern  copyright  laws  could  hardly  be 
more  stringently  safeguarded. 

On  the  whole,  the  case  made  by  the  critics  for 
the  mode  of  production,  the  laudable  purpose,  the 
innocent  intent,  and  the  intrinsic  value  of  the  rec- 
ords in  question,  is  one  which  the  ordinary  man  is 
likely  to  view  with  much  suspicion.  The  facts  seem 
to  be  against  it ;  it  does  not  coincide  with  accepted 
views  as  to  the  constitution  of  the  Oriental  mind 
in  its  superstitious  reverence  for  the  thing  written  ; 
it  is  expressly  negatived  by  the  concededly  rigid 
immobility  of  the  Jewish  character,  and  its  intense 
conservatism  and  loyalty  to  ancient  standards.  It 
is  utterly  opposed  even  to  the  most  rudimen- 
tary conceptions  of  honesty  and  veracity — qualities 
which,  at  bottom,  are  surely  not  affected  either  by 
longitude  or  the  calendar. 

This  subject  has  received  very  gingerly  treat- 
ment at  the  hands  of  the  critics  and  their  adher- 
ents. It  is  rarely  brought  into  first  prominence 
or  fully  considered  in  all  its  bearings.  As  a  rule, 
its  seamy  side  is  kept  sedulously  in  the  back- 
ground, and  its  difficulties  are  sought  to  be  met 
and  overcome  by  the  statement  that  they  are 
referable  to  the  human  element  which  all  must  ad- 
mit is  present  in  the  Scriptures.     Human  element, 

1  Pinches,  "The  Old  Testament  and  the  Historical  Records 
of  Assyria,"  etc.,  p.  517. 

220 


THE    QUESTION    OF    MORALS 


yes  !  But  criminal  element  ?  A  thousand  times, 
no  !  A  record  which  even  lays  itself  open  to  the 
charge  of  fraud,  impersonation,  and  false  pretenses, 
as  we  understand  those  terms,  can  never  be  finally 
accepted  by  sober  Christian  thought  as  the  conduit 
through  which  God  conveys  his  truth  to  men. 

The  moral  issue  cannot  be  evaded.  It  will  not 
down,  but  will  insistently  urge  a  solution  conso- 
nant, at  least,  with  elementary  notions  of  right  and 
wrong,  of  truth  and  falsity.  All  that  the  critics 
have  hitherto  done  in  this  direction  is  to  present 
explanations  which  are  evasions,  to  offer  excuses 
which  are  accusations,  to  postulate  ideas  the 
prevalence  of  which  they  have  not  proved,  and  to 
assume  customs  the  existence  of  which  is  more 
than  dubious.  The  excuses  are  an  insult  to  com- 
mon sense  ;  the  pleas  in  justification  are  an  outrage 
upon  common  decency. 


221 


XVI 

THE  PRACTICAL  OUTCOME 


We  have  to  look  facts  in  the  face.  Men  may  make  what 
private  exceptions  from  their  own  theory  they  please;  what 
we  have  to  do  with  is  this  view  of  the  formation  of  Scrip- 
ture, in  its  principles  and  implications.  And  facing  that, 
we  have  no  scruples  in  saying  that  if  we  accept  the  con- 
clusions of  criticism  then  we  have  no  longer  an  authorita- 
tive revelation.  Our  warrant  for  going  to  the  whole  world 
and  offering  pardon  and  renewal  and  eternal  life  on  the 
ground  of  a  divine  covenant  promise,  foreshadowed  in  the 
Old  Testament  and  revealed  in  the  New,  is  taken  away. 
The  Bible  is  no  longer  the  solitary,  immediate  unveiling  of 
God,  discovering  a  purpose,  founding  a  kingdom  in  which 
humanity  should  reach  its  goal,  and  the  meaning  and  end 
of  all  existence  should  stand  clear.  Judaism  and  Chris- 
tianity have  their  true  place  among  the  ethnic  religions,  if 
on  that  level  they  are  the  best.  —John  Smith. 


Other  knowledge  I  disdain, 

'  Tis  all  but  vanity. 
Christ  the  Lamb  of  God  was  slain, 

He  tasted  death  for  me. 
Me  to  save  from  endless  woe, 

The  sin-atoning  victim  died ; 
Only  Jesus  will  I  know, 

And  Jesus  crucified. 

—  Charles  Wesley. 


XVI 

THE    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 

Behold,  the  word  of  the  Lord  is  unto  them  a  reproach  ; 
they  have  no  delight  in  it.  Jeremiah,  i,:*0 

It  is  now  about  a  generation  since  the  various 
branches  of  the  evangelical  church  in  English- 
speaking  countries  began  to  be  subjected  to  the 
influences  of  the  higher  criticism.  For  the  past 
ten  years  that  influence  may  be  said  to  have 
been  a  dominant  force,  modifying,  if  not  absolutely 
negativing,  old  forms  of  belief  ;  necessitating  the 
restatement  of  nearly  every  one  of  the  cardinal 
doctrines  of  Christianity  in  such  wise  as  to  present 
them  in  aspects  fundamentally  different  from  all 
previous  conceptions  and  formulations  thereof ; 
shifting  the  points  of  emphasis  and  the  seat  and 
ground  of  authority  in  matters  of  faith  ;  tending 
increasingly  toward  a  rationalistic  basis  and  the 
elimination  of  the  supernatural ;  molding  and 
coloring  the  utterances  of  classroom,  press,  and 
pulpit ;  and  so  impressing  its  ideals  and  tenden- 
cies upon  the  whole  congregation  of  Christian 
people  as  to  force  upon  the  least  observant  among 
them  the  consciousness  of  a  radical  change  in  the 
p  225 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

spiritual  atmosphere  and  life  of  the  church,  its 
attitude  toward  doctrinal  standards,  its  conceptions 
of  the  conditions  of  experimental  religion,  and  its 
relations  to  the  outside  world.  It  is,  perhaps,  not 
too  soon  to  inquire  whether,  on  the  whole,  these 
influences  have  been  wholesome  or  harmful. 

On  the  scholastic  side  of  this  subject  the  writer 
has  and  claims  no  qualifications  to  speak.  A  vast 
impetus  has  doubtless  been  imparted  to  the  study 
of  ancient  Hebrew  and  cognate  branches  of  learn- 
ing ;  much  exegetical  skill  and  acumen  developed ; 
a  large  fund  of  curious  information  and  some  mis- 
information accumulated;  the  " historical  setting" 
of  many  passages  projected  with  great  ability  and 
some  plausibility  ;  and  world-wide  reputations  for 
indefatigable  industry,  patient  research,  profound 
erudition,  and  brilliant  system-building  deservedly 
achieved. 

But  in  his  conception  of  the  essential  nature  of 
vital  godliness  and  its  divinely  laid  avenues  of  ap- 
proach, the  importance  of  that  aspect  of  the  ques- 
tion has  been  greatly  overrated.  It  is  quite  pos- 
sible that  the  advantages  acquired  may  have  been 
purchased  at  too  high  a  price ;  and  that  the  re- 
sultant apotheosis  of  learning— a  mere  by-product, 
perhaps,  of  the  higher  criticism — may  involve 
grievous  disloyalty  to  Christ.  Many  devout  Chris- 
tians of  the  old-fashioned  sort,  forming  not  the 
least  valuable  constituents  of  the  membership  of 
226 


THE    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 


the  organized  church  to-day,  gravely  doubt  whether 
criticism,  with  ail  its  achievements,  has  thrown  one 
scintilla  of  light  upon  the  spiritual  content  of 
biblical  truth  ;  and  they  more  than  doubt  whether 
any  of  its  discoveries,  or  all  of  them  put  together, 
have  ever  been  influential  in  bringing  one  unbe- 
lieving heart  to  a  saving  knowledge  of  the  truth  as 
it  is  in  Jesus.  They,  rather,  incline  to  the  opinion 
that  through  its  pursuit,  and  through  the  attempted 
philosophies  and  sciences  of  religion  of  which  it 
has  been  the  moving  cause,  the  cross  of  Christ  is 
made  of  none  effect.  They  conceive,  indeed,  that 
the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus,  with  all  its 
antecedent  stages  and  all  its  subsequent  issues,  is 
neither  a  science  nor  a  philosophy ;  that  it  cannot 
be  confined  within  the  limits  of  a  philosophical 
system  ;  and  that  its  principles  are  not  amenable 
to  scientific  or  philosophical  processes,  being,  like 
all  transcendental  facts,  insusceptible  of  final  and 
complete  analysis.  They,  therefore,  are  strongly 
of  the  conviction  that  criticism,  science,  and 
philosophy,  as  elements  of  primary  importance  in 
the  inception,  growth,  and  nurture  of  the  Chris- 
tian life,  may  safely  be  ignored,  or  at  least  that 
intellectual  apprehension  with  all  its  incentives  to 
human  arrogance  and  pride  ought  of  right  to  yield 
place  to  that  nobler  faculty  by  which  divine  truths 
are  "  spiritually  discerned."  ■ 

1  Robertson,  "Early  Religion  of  Israel,"  Pref. 
227 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

They  repudiate  the  notion  that  the  eternal  pur. 
pose  of  mercy  and  grace  which  God  has  pictured 
in  his  dealings  with  his  ancient  people  and  illu- 
minated by  the  revelation  of  the  gospel  of  his  Son, 
must  be  seen  through  scholastic  spectacles  and 
the  refractions  of  a  university  atmosphere  before 
its  true  perspective  can  be  perceived  and  its  essen- 
tial significance  grasped  by  the  millions  to  whom 
its  messages  of  life  are  primarily  addressed.  They 
cannot  entertain  the  thought  that  the  sincere  milk 
of  the  word  must  be  strained  through  academic 
colanders  before  it  is  digestible  by  the  class  who 
in  the  days  of  our  Saviour's  flesh  "  heard  him 
gladly." 

And  they  would  protest  against  the  incipient 
recrudescence  of  the  exclusive  caste  spirit,  which 
is  of  the  very  essence  of  sacerdotalism,  with  its 
necessity  for  a  professorial  intermediary  between 
the  individual  soul  and  its  reception  and  assimila- 
tion of  the  truths  of  God,  as  vigorously  as  did 
their  forefathers  against  the  monstrous  pretension 
that  salvation  was  not  of  free  grace  and  not  to  be 
obtained  except  by  dropping  good  guilders  into  the 
proper  institutional  coffers. 

They  readily  admit  the  legitimacy  of  the  ancil- 
lary relations  of  learning  and  scholarship,  but  they 
are  as  prompt  to  resent  any  attempt  on  the  part  of 
those  handmaids  to  usurp  the  position  of  mistress 
of  the  household  of  faith.  "Thirdly,  teachers," 
228 


THE    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 


is  Paul's  assignment  of  relative  priority ;  and  they 
would  not  willingly  see  these  "  ten  thousand  in- 
structors in  Christ "  wrongfully  elevated  to  the 
topmost  seat. 

The  educational  ideals  of  the  day,  and  their 
overshadowing  influence  upon  modern  methods  in 
Christian  work  they  deprecate,  as  involving  the 
vicious  assumption  that  there  is  in  human  nature 
every  element  necessary  to  enable  men  to  accom- 
plish their  own  salvation,  needing  only  the  agen- 
cies of  the  classroom  applied  by  properly  certified 
tutors  to  bring  it  out.  If,  indeed,  the  inception 
and  development  of  the  Christian  life  depended 
upon  correct  mental  operations,  and  were  con- 
terminous with  or  to  be  admeasured  by  the  breadth 
and  vividness  of  our  intellectual  apprehensions  ; 
then  the  pursuit  of  critical  methods  with  all  their 
correlatives  and  implications  would  not  only  be 
commendable  in  our  leaders  of  Christian  thought — 
they  would  be  an  imperative  necessity  for  all. 
And  this  curious  result  would  follow  :  The  wise 
and  the  learned  would  partake  of  its  gifts  to  the 
full,  while  the  common  people,  the  poor  and  the 
illiterate,  would  be  turned  empty  away. 

They  believe  that  the  precise  contrary  is  the 
fact,  and  that  through  the  gift  and  calling  of  God 
the  Bushman  with  his  vocabulary  of  three  hundred 
monosyllables  may  as  truly  know  and  as  effectually 
testify  to  the  life-giving  power  of  the  engrafted 
229 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

word  as  the  decipherer  of  cuneiform  inscriptions 
who  can  see  in  the  God-given  laws  of  Sinai  only 
mutilated  fragments  of  a  forgotten  and  resuscitated 
Babylonian  code. 

In  their  view,  the  very  highest  type  of  Christian 
character,  replete  with  every  grace  and  abounding 
in  all  spiritual  wisdom  and  endowment  is  possible 
of  attainment,  wholly  irrespective  either  of  the 
possession  or  the  lack  of  education,  so  that  one 
who  never  heard  of  the  inductive  method  or  of  a 
logical  process,  may  nevertheless  be  so  deeply 
versed  in  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom,  and  so 
fitted  to  impart  spiritual  gifts  to  others,  as  to  be  a 
duly  commissioned  ambassador  of  Christ,  and  a 
divinely  directed  teacher  of  the  righteousness 
which  is  by  faith. 

Their  conviction  is  that  the  most  potent  hin- 
drance to  the  spread  of  Christianity  and  to  the 
maintenance  of  a  high  quality  of  spiritual  life  in 
the  church  is  not  to  be  found  in  human  ignorance 
of  the  elements  of  Christian  truth,  but  rather  in 
the  obduracy  of  the  human  will  and  the  alienation 
of  the  human  heart ;  in  the  rebellion,  in  short,  of 
fallen  human  nature  against  the  sovereignty  and 
governance  of  God.  And  to  overcome  these  re- 
sistive forces  a  mightier  sword  is  needed  than  was 
ever  forged  in  any  collegiate  workshop,  or  borne 
by  any  university  don,  how  great  soever  may  be 
the  skill  with  which  he  handles  the  weapons  of  his 
230 


THE    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 


craft.  The  sword  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  the  word 
of  God,  will  alone  avail  here ;  and  the  efficiency 
of  that  instrument  the  critics  are  industriously 
seeking  to  impair,  if  not  destroy. 

Habits  of  accurate  thinking,  the  polish  of  cul- 
ture, the  graces  of  form,  the  sense  of  proportion, 
the  amenities  and  the  refinements  of  life,  may  be, 
and  doubtless  are,  acquired  through  the  discipline 
of  the  schools  ;  but  life  itself,  spiritual,  divine,  can 
only  be  imparted  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  pictured  in 
old  time  by  Jehovah's  prophet  as  breathing  over 
the  dry  bones  in  the  Valley  of  Vision.  And  this 
is  an  agency  which  the  high  priests  of  modern 
Christian  culture,  in  act  if  not  in  word,  have  suf- 
fered to  sink  into  desuetude ;  if,  indeed,  they  have 
not  discredited  it  altogether  as  the  refuge  of  the 
unbalanced  and  the  fanatic. 

But  Christians  of  the  type  mentioned  steadfastly 
maintain  the  older  conceptions  of  the  office  and 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  their  most  explicit  form  ; 
to  wit,  that  men  may,  and  actually  do,  receive  the 
direct  light  and  leading  of  the  Spirit  in  answer  to 
sincere  and  believing  prayer  ;  that  without  his  aid, 
humbly  depended  on  and  devoutly  sought,  the 
truths  of  holy  writ  are  a  sealed  word,  and  will 
not  yield  up  their  secrets  to  the  profoundest  in- 
sight or  the  most  penetrating  analysis  ;  and  that 
any  method  or  system,  whether  sacerdotal  or 
scholastic,  which  even  looks  toward  independence 
231 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

of  this  agency,  or  tends  to  the  deposition  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  from  his  paramount  place  as  Inter- 
preter of  the  mind  of  God  as  set  forth  in  the  writ- 
ten word,  or  seeks  through  any  other  avenue  than 
his  convicting  and  converting  power  to  bring  men 
into  the  kingdom  of  Christ  is  a  distinct  and  un- 
equivocal departure  from  the  faith  once  delivered 
unto  the  saints. 

This  departure  they  regard  as  having  already 
taken  place ;  and  in  their  estimate  the  conditions 
existing  in  the  visible  church  of  to-day  tend 
strongly  to  confirm  that  view.  They  refuse  to  be 
deceived  by  surface  indications  of  prosperity.  They 
are  not  impressed  by  the  multiform  activities  of 
the  church  along  social  and  economic  lines,  with 
its  numberless  societies  and  organizations.  They 
regard  the  endless  succession  of  church  clubs  and 
schools,  reading  clubs,  debating  clubs,  dramatic 
clubs,  athletic  clubs,  schools  of  social  and  domes- 
tic science,  of  industrial  training,  of  civic  study, 
and  of  secular  education  generally,  as  but  sorry 
makeshifts  for  a  lost  gospel  and  a  vanished 
power.  In  their  view  these  institutions,  some  of 
them  praiseworthy  in  the  highest  degree,  belong 
primarily  to  the  secular  order ;  and  the  greatest 
measure  of  success  in  achievement  along  those 
lines  may  be,  and  very  likely  will  be,  coincident 
with  spiritual  barrenness  and  destitution  of  the 
most  pronounced  type.  They  conceive  that  the 
232 


THE    PRACTICAL   OUTCOME 


mission  of  the  church  of  the  living  God  is  other 
and  higher  than  the  improvement  of  material  con- 
ditions or  the  amelioration  of  the  social  order  ;  and 
that  the  divine  ideal  and  aim  is  in  imminent  dan- 
ger of  being  swamped  and  lost  sight  of  in  the 
multitude  of  worldly  activities  to  which  it  has  lent 
itself.  And  they  look  upon  the  erection  of  costly 
church  edifices  with  elaborate  "  plants,"  apparently 
on  the  department  store  plan,  and  the  contribution 
of  vast  aggregations  of  wealth  devoted  to  the 
carrying  out  of  this  varied  programme,  as  but  the 
tithings  of  mint,  anise,  and  cummin,  to  the  neglect 
of  the  weightier  matters  of  the  law. 

For,  side  by  side  with  all  this  show  of  bustle 
and  activity — much  of  it  mere  empty  dress  parade, 
and  most  of  it  wholly  irrelevant  to  the  distinctive 
duty  of  spreading  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ — they  note  ever-increasing  symptoms  of  a 
widespread  and  deep-seated  spiritual  declension. 
We  seem,  for  example,  to  have  reached  an  absolute 
halt  in  the  matter  of  the  numerical  increase  of  the 
church.  Population  is  mounting  up  by  leaps  and 
bounds,  and  we  are  standing  still,  if  not  actually 
going  behind.  The  fathers  are  dying  out,  and  the 
children  are  not  taking  their  places  !  And  this, 
not  because  the  standard  of  admission  has  been 
raised  and  the  conditions  of  membership  made 
more  stringent ;  for  the  direct  contrary  is  the 
truth.     To-day  little  more  is  required  than  a  bare 

233 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

willingness  to  "join  the  church,"  and  in  many 
cases  even  that  is  secured  by  attractions  and  in- 
ducements strikingly  resembling  the  "gift  enter- 
prises "  with  which  wide-awake  shopkeepers  tempt 
customers  to  their  stores. 

There  is  manifest,  moreover,  a  lamentable  fall- 
ing away  in  the  matter  of  the  observance  of  pub- 
lic worship.  Christians  go  to  or  stay  away  from 
the  services  of  the  sanctuary  for  much  the  same 
reasons  which  prompt  men  in  going  to  or  staying 
away  from  the  theatre  or  the  lyceum — the  weather, 
the  attractiveness  of  the  programme,  personal  incli- 
nations, and  the  like.  Once  the  believer  did  not 
regard  himself  as  having  any  choice  in  the  matter  ; 
it  was  his  duty  to  go,  and  if  he  neglected  this  duty, 
his  conscience  accused  him  of  withholding  due 
homage  from  his  God.  To-day  he  goes  if  he  feels 
like  it ;  and  as  often  as  not  he  does  not  feel  like 
it.  And  if  this  is  so  with  the  believing  units,  what 
of  the  unbelieving  masses  ?  As  we  know,  they 
simply  will  not  go,  and  nothing  in  the  way  of  sen- 
sational theme,  or  operatic  performance,  or  magic- 
lantern  show,  will  tempt  them  there.  As  they 
bluntly  put  it,  they  have  no  use  for  the  church. 

And  with  all  this  there  is  present  to-day  an  all- 
pervading  spirit  of  skepticism  such  as  can  find  no 
parallel  in  all  the  ages  of  Christian  history.  There 
have  been  skeptics  and  skeptical  periods  before, 
but  their  manifestation  has  been  largely  confined 
234 


THE    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 


to  avowed  enemies  of  all  revealed  religion,  leaving 
the  great  body  of  the  church  untouched.  Now 
they  are  entrenched  in  the  very  citadel  of  faith, 
and  its  bitterest  foes  are  they  of  its  own  household. 
As  has  been  seen,  criticism,  keen,  mordant,  hostile, 
emanating  from  so-called  leaders  of  religious 
thought,  is  seeking  to  sap  the  foundations  of  every 
distinctive  doctrine  of  the  Christian  creed,  to 
eliminate  every  vestige  of  the  supernatural  from 
the  Christian  records,  to  reduce  the  authentic  re- 
mains of  Christ's  life  and  words  to  a  few  moral 
precepts,  and  to  depend  for  the  growth  and  perpe- 
tuity of  the  influence  of  Christianity  over  men  upon 
the  operation  of  what  is  at  best  an  unverified  and 
unverifiable  working  hypothesis  which  concededly 
fails  to  account  for  all  the  facts,  but  which  they 
elevate  to  the  highest  rank,  as  a  power  holding 
exclusive  sway  over  the  whole  realm  of  phenomena ; 
a  law  embracing  in  its  scope  matter,  mind,  morals, 
and  religion  ;  a  master-key  to  unlock  all  mysteries 
of  life  and  being ;  and  a  universal  solvent  of  every 
problem  that  can  arise  in  the  heavens  above  and 
the  earth  beneath  and  the  waters  under  the  earth  ; 
and  which  they  apotheosize  under  the  name  of  the 
law  of  evolution. 

Can  it  be  wondered  at,  under  such  circum- 
stances, that  our  churches  are  honeycombed 
through  and  through  with  uncertainty  and  doubt, 
and  have  consequently  drifted  into  such  a  stagnant 

235 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

backwater  of  indifference  that  the  eclipse  of  faith 
among  us  has  ceased  to  be  a  matter  of  general 
concern  ?  Materialism  of  the  worst  sort,  i.  e.y  the 
practical,  is  rampant ;  things  seen  and  temporal 
loom  so  largely  and  desirably,  and  things  unseen 
and  eternal  seem  so  far  off  and  so  dubious,  that 
for  all  practical  purposes  the  motto  of  to-day  is  : 
"Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die." 
And  these  are  not  mere  isolated  symptoms,  but 
are  so  general  as  to  stamp  their  features  upon 
the  time  in  which  we  live  and  to  characterize  it  as 
pre-eminently  the  age  of  unbelief. 

Some  may  question  whether  the  condition  of 
impotence  into  which  the  church  of  Christ  has 
fallen  to-day  is  fairly  chargeable  to  the  influence 
of  the  higher  criticism,  and  the  consequences 
which  have  followed  in  its  train.  In  the  writer's 
judgment,  and  he  by  no  means  stands  alone  in 
this  opinion,  there  is  little  doubt  of  it.  They 
seem  well  calculated  to  produce  just  such  effects, 
and  no  reason  appears  that  what  is  a  sufficient  is 
not  also  the  efficient  cause. 

Two  facts  lend  support  to  this  view  :  one  is  neg- 
lect of  the  Bible  itself ;  the  other  is  disregard  of 
biblical  teaching. 

The  astounding  ignorance,  even  among  Christian 

people,  of  the  contents  of  the  Bible,  as  compared 

with  the  intimate  familiarity  with  it  which  obtained 

only  a  generation  since,  is  so  patent  as  to  be  no- 

236 


THE    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 


torious.  But  why  should  we  greatly  wonder  at  it  ? 
Why  should  they  concern  themselves  about  the 
matter,  so  long  as  they  are  in  doubt  whether  it  is 
merely  the  literature  of  the  ancient  Hebrews,  or 
the  law  of  the  living  God  that  they  are  called  upon 
to  read  ?  Who  can  blame  them  for  suspending 
interest  until  the  critics  decide  which  part  is  the 
word  of  God  and  which  is  not  ?  And  this  ques- 
tion is  one  which,  Professor  Briggs  tells  us,  the 
higher  criticism  can  never  determine.1 

Nor  is  the  modern  disregard  of  biblical  teach- 
ing on  all  great  fundamental  questions  any  less 
marked.  Take,  for  instance,  the  change  in  the 
attitude  of  the  religious  world  of  to-day  toward 
scriptural  declarations  as  to  sin,  its  consequences, 
and  its  remedy.  There  was  a  time  within  the 
memory  of  the  living  when  the  evangelical  church 
was  a  substantial  unit  in  recognizing  sin  as  a  deadly 
and  a  damning  fact  in  universal  human  history, 
underlying  and  coloring  all  our  conceptions  as  to 
the  nature  and  destiny  of  man.  It  was  regarded 
as  infinitely  hateful  to  God,  and  as  meriting  and 
entailing  the  profoundest  depths  of  the  divine  dis- 
pleasure and  the  stern  infliction  of  the  divine  judg- 
ment. It  was  an  evil  so  inveterate  and  desperate 
that  to  save  men  from  its  dominion  and  its  doom 
God  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  freely  delivered  him 
up  for  us  all.     And  with  these  tremendous  truths 

1  Briggs,    "Biblical  Study,"  p.  220. 
237 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

before  them,  ministers  of  the  word  shunned  not 
to  declare  unto  men  the  whole  counsel  of  God, 
depicting  in  no  uncertain  terms  the  warnings  of 
holy  writ  as  to  the  doom  of  the  impenitent,  and 
with  strong  pleadings  and  tears  exhorting  sinners 
to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come. 

Now  when  we  inquire  into  modern  views  upon 
those  fundamental  questions,  we  become  conscious 
of  a  change  so  vast  as  to  be  startling.  "  This 
difference,"  says  Dale  of  Birmingham,  in  a  sermon 
on  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  "  is  so  great,  it  affects 
so  seriously  the  whole  system  of  the  religious 
thought  and  life,  that  we  seem  to  have  invented  a 
new  religion."  And  this  is  notably  true  of  the 
utterances  of  the  advance  guard  of  the  new  the- 
ology, who  seem  determined,  as  before  stated,  to 
fit  Christianity  into  some  niche  of  the  Spencerian 
system,  and  to  restate  the  gospel  in  terms,  and 
only  in  terms,  of  the  evolutionary  theory  ;  accord- 
ing to  which  sin  is  transmuted  into  a  mere  defect 
in  the  adjustment  of  the  organism  to  its  environ- 
ment. And  this  same  philosophy,  by  the  agency 
of  its  twin  demi-gods  heredity  and  environment, 
reduces  man's  accountability  for  sin  to  an  insig- 
nificant minimum;  the  impact  of  the  iron  hand  of 
circumstance  upon  inherited  qualities  and  tenden- 
cies amounting  almost  to  absolute  determinism,  so 
that  under  its  pressure  the  free  will  of  man  dwin- 
dles into  the  shadow  of  a  shade. 
238 


THF    PRACTICAL    OUTCOME 


This  conception  granted  there  does  not  seem  to 
be  any  room  for  the  belief  that  God  has  any  strong 
resentment  against  sin,  or  against  those  who  are 
guilty  of  it.  And  since  his  resentment  is  gone, 
his  mercy  goes  with  it,  the  forgiveness  of  sin  fades 
into  an  idle  phrase,  and  the  humiliation,  agony, 
and  death  of  the  Lord  Jesus  become  a  wanton 
infliction  of  useless  suffering,  an  irrelevant  inter- 
vention, thrusting  itself  without  cause  or  purpose 
into  the  mechanism  of  the  orderly  processes  of 
evolution  by  law.  Truly,  whatever  else  this  so- 
called  Christian  philosophy  may  or  may  not  have 
achieved,  it  has  robbed  the  crucifixion  of  all  mean- 
ing, and  the  atonement  of  all  power. 

These  views  prevailing,  and  it  is  not  to  be  de- 
nied that  they  are  on  the  increase,  it  is  the  veriest 
juggling  with  words  to  contend  that  of  the  gospel 
as  set  forth  in  the  New  Testament,  and  as  con- 
ceived in  every  age  of  the  church  save  the  present, 
one  shred  or  vestige  remains.  Sooner  or  later  too, 
the  common  sense  of  the  common  people  will  de- 
tect the  void  behind  the  mask  ;  and  they  can  never 
permanently  content  themselves  with  a  vacuity. 


239 


XVII 

CHRIST   VERSUS    CRITICISM 


The  Old  Testament  canon  is  accredited  by  an  authority  of 
which  the  New  Testament  is  devoid.  This  is  the  authority 
of  Jesus  Christ  himself.  —George  Adam  Smith. 


No  theory  can  possibly  be  true  which  conflicts  with  the 
direct  teaching  of  Christ.  This  may  seem  to  some  a  very 
needless  truism;  unfortunately,  it  is  a  very  necessary  re- 
minder. We  are  prepared  as  Christian  men  to  receive  and 
welcome  the  fullest  light  of  the  new  learning.  We  are  not 
prepared  to  be  dragged  at  the  wheels  of  those  who  would 
give  us  a  discredited  Old  Testament,  an  emasculated  New 
Testament,  a  fallible  Christ  Robert  Sinker. 


XVII 

CHRIST    VERSUS    CRITICISM 

Had  ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  me  ; 
for  he  wrote  of  me.      But  if  ye  believe  not  his  writings,  how 

shall  ye  believe  my  words  ?  Jesus. 

Jen*  JTi/t.,l/7> 

By  far  the  gravest  of  all  the  issues  presented  by 
the  higher  criticism  is  that  which  springs  out  of 
the  relation  which  it  purports  to  establish  between 
our  divine  Lord  and  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures. 
If  the  Lord  Jesus  is  right  in  his  estimate  of  those 
writings,  then  the  critics  are  not  only  wrong  but 
slanderously  and  traitorously  wrong  in  that  they 
impugn  either  his  wisdom  or  his  veracity  and 
utterly  set  at  naught  his  authority  to  the  extent 
even  of  denying  to  his  words  the  slightest  weight 
as  testimony.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  critics 
are  right,  our  Saviour  is — what  ? 

This  is  a  question  which  the  Christian  can  by 
no  means  afford  to  leave  unanswered.  Nor  can 
he  be  content  with  an  answer  which  is  an  evasion 
or  which  fails  at  any  point  fully  and  squarely  to 
meet  the  issue  raised,  for  it  is  a  matter  of  supreme 
importance  and  one  which  goes  to  the  heart  of 
things.     It  is  well  that  he  should  have  clearly  in 

243 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

mind  the  precise  use  that  our  Lord  made  of  those 
Scriptures  and  the  authority  he  accorded  to  them. 
He  will  then  be  in  a  position  to  judge  whether  the 
divine  authentication  and  the  critical  condemna- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament  are  not  so  utterly  at 
variance  as  to  be  mutually  destructive,  so  that  he 
who  holds  the  one  cannot  possibly  accept  the  other. 
He  may,  perhaps,  if  he  is  given  to  the  propounding 
of  unprofitable  questions  resting  in  wiredrawn  and 
casuistical  distinctions,  go  further  and  ask  whether 
any  of  the  solutions  offered  by  the  "  Christian 
critics "  is  sufficient  to  form  a  common  ground 
whereon  these  opposing  conceptions  may  meet  and 
harmonize  without  derogation  of  the  claims  of  our 
Saviour  as  to  his  person  and  his  mission. 

Our  Lord,  for  instance,  treats  as  historical  facts 
the  Noachian  deluge  with  the  saving  of  Noah  and 
his  house,  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah 
with  the  narrow  escape  of  Lot  therefrom,  the  ap- 
pearance of  Jehovah  to  Moses  in  the  burning  bush, 
the  giving  of  the  manna  and  the  lifting  up  of  the 
brazen  serpent  in  the  wilderness,  recognizing  too 
in  the  last  event  a  prophecy  of  the  manner  and 
of  the  saving  purpose  of  his  own  death.  The 
critics  say  that  these  incidents  are,  one  and  all, 
unhistorical,  being  mere  blends  of  myth  and  second- 
hand traditions,  worked  over  again  and  again,  with 
no  trace  of  discoverable  evidence  behind  them. 

He  repeatedly  speaks  of  Abraham  as  a  real  per- 
244 


CHRIST    VERSUS    CRITICISM 


son,  the  generic  head  of  Israel,  on  one  occasion  in 
such  a  way  as  manifestly  to  point  to  the  promise 
that  "  in  him  should  all  the  families  of  the  earth 
be  blessed."  The  critics  dispose  of  Abraham  as 
a  lunar  hero,  "  the  free  creation  of  unconscious 
art,"  a  fictitious  character,  belief  in  whose  actuality 
had  not,  even  in  the  days  of  Amos,  reached  the 
same  stage  as  that  regarding  Isaac  and  Jacob,  one 
critic,  it  is  true,  admitting  a  mysterious  "  critical 
reaction  in  favor  of  recognizing  "  his  personality. 

Our  Lord  authenticates  the  accounts  of  the 
miraculous  preservation  of  the  widow  of  Zarephath 
and  her  son,  and  of  the  cleansing  of  Naaman,  the 
Syrian  leper.  To  the  critics  they  are  but  the 
"  anecdotic  chaff "  with  which  the  really  valuable 
historical  notes  in  the  books  of  Kings  are  largely 
mixed  ;  unhistorical  traditions  of  "curious  marvels" 
current  in  prophetic  circles  in  the  9-8  century  b.  c. 

He  apparently  treats  the  journey  and  mission 
of  the  prophet  Jonah  to  the  Ninevites  as  sober 
history,  founding  upon  the  facts  of  that  history  a 
rebuke  to  his  hearers  for  their  unbelief  and  finding 
in  its  strangest  incident  a  prophecy  in  act  of  his 
own  death,  burial,  and  resurrection.  To  the  critics 
it  is  not  history  at  all  nor  was  ever  intended  as 
such,  being  a  mere  post-exilic  parable  or  allegory, 
borrowing  some  of  its  features  from  a  Babylonian 
dragon   myth.1      The    critic    cited    piously  asks, 

1  Smith,  "  Book  of  the  Twelve,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  524. 
245 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

"  How  long,  O  Lord,  must  thy  poetry  suffer  from 
those  who  can  only  treat  it  as  prose  ? "  He  goes 
on  to  insist  that  there  is  no  attempt  made  to  "  re- 
cord an  historical  conversion  of  this  vast  heathen 
city."  Christ  says  that  the  men  of  Nineveh  "re- 
pented at  the  preaching  of  Jonah."  The  two 
statements  may  be  left  to  stand  side  by  side. 

In  his  great  forecast  of  the  signs  of  his  coming 
and  of  the  end  of  the  world  he  expressly  quotes 
and  applies  a  prediction  of  the  prophet  Daniel,  men- 
tioning him  by  name.  Criticism  decides  that  there 
was  no  prophet  Daniel  nor  were  any  prophecies 
uttered  by  him,  and  that  the  book  in  which  they 
purport  to  be  recorded  is  a  religious  romance  of 
the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

With  respect  to  the  attitude  of  our  Lord  toward 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  generally,  it  would 
seem  to  be  needless  to  multiply  instances.  At 
large  and  in  detail,  by  words  as  clear  and  unam- 
biguous as  language  affords,  he  pays  the  fullest 
tribute  to  their  genuineness  and  authenticity,  their 
absolute  truth,  their  abiding  authority,  and  their 
divine  origin.  Repeatedly  he  assigns  the  author- 
ship of  the  Pentateuch  to  Moses,  whose  legislative 
enactments  he  in  turn  identifies  with  "the  com- 
mandments of  God."  In  his  mysterious  tempta- 
tion in  the  wilderness  the  only  answers  he  vouch- 
safes to  the  tempter's  pleas  are  quotations  from 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  Of  the  law  of  Moses 
246 


CHRIST    VERSUS    CRITICISM 


he  says  :  "  Till  heaven  and  earth  pass  away,  one 
jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  nowise  pass  from  the  law 
till  all  be  fulfilled."  Again  and  again  he  asserts 
that  these  Scriptures  prophesied  of  him,  saying  of 
them:  "  They  are  they  which  testify  of  me." 
Upon  them,  in  part  at  least,  he  bases  his  Messianic 
claims,  and  to  them  he  appeals  as  grounds  for 
belief  in  him  as  the  Christ  of  God. 

Can  the  issue  between  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
and  the  higher  critics  be  more  sharply  drawn  ? 
Who  is  in  the  right  and  whose  words  are  to  be 
believed  ?  Is  it  possible  for  the  Christian  to  concur 
in  the  verdict  of  the  critics  without  rejecting  the 
testimony  of  the  Lord  that  bought  him  ? 

That  the  antagonism  suggested  in  fact  exists  is 
not  denied,  nor  is  there  any  ground  on  which  such 
a  denial  could  possibly  rest.  To  the  devout  Chris- 
tian this  creates  a  startling  situation.  He  has  ever 
regarded  his  Master's  slightest  word  as  of  the 
essence  of  the  truth,  as  possessing  supreme  au- 
thority and  as  commanding  his  instant  and  un- 
questioning belief.  He  is  now  told  that  it  is  not 
only  permissible,  but  requisite  to  a  right  under- 
standing of  the  subject  that  he  should  reject  that 
word  on  matters  vitally  affecting  his  Lord's  au- 
thority as  a  teacher  and  his  claims  to  divine  Son- 
ship,  and  that  he  must  accept  in  place  thereof 
dicta  which  have  formed  the  stock  in  trade  of 
every  enemy  of  revealed  religion  from  the  time  of 
247 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

Porphyry  onward.  The  Christian  may  well  ask  : 
Where  is  this  process  to  stop,  and  at  what  stage 
may  I  be  certified  that  the  teachings  of  Christ 
are  infallible  and  to  be  implicitly  followed  ?  If  he 
was  in  error  as  to  the  past,  what  assurance  have  I 
that  he  was  not  also  in  error  as  to  the  future  ?  If 
wrong  in  one  point,  why  not  in  all  ? 

It  will  not  do  to  say  that  his  utterances  as  to 
the  nature  and  integrity  of  the  Scriptures  are 
negligible  and  unauthoritative,  but  that  his  decla- 
rations regarding  himself  and  his  relations  to  the 
Father  and  to  the  believer  are  matters  of  faith  to 
be  received  and  obeyed  by  all  who  would  become 
his  disciples.  For  these  two  elements  overlap, 
and  are  indeed  so  closely  interwoven  that  they 
cannot  be  separated  without  the  impairment  of 
both.  Our  Lord  too  makes  no  such  distinction. 
On  the  contrary,  he  continually  finds  in  the  one 
prophecy  and  proof  of  the  truth  of  his  statements 
as  to  the  other.  Nor  does  he  entertain  the  delu- 
sion that  those  who  deny  the  one  may  be  expected 
to  accept  the  other.  He  says  :  "  We  speak  that 
we  do  know,  and  ye  receive  not  our  testimony. 
If  I  tell  you  earthly  things,  and  ye  believe  not, 
how  shall  ye  believe  when  I  tell  you  of  heavenly 
things  ? " 

The  suggestion  is  an  intolerable  one  in  any  case, 
as  an  attempt  to  parallel  the  situation  in  actual 
life  will  show.  A  project  is  brought  forward  by 
248 


CHRIST   VERSUS    CRITICISM 


one  who  seeks  to  procure  its  general  acceptance 
and  to  persuade  men  to  pledge  their  action  in  aid 
of  its  execution.  To  effectuate  his  purpose  and 
to  secure  the  necessary  co-operation  he  makes  a 
series  of  representations.  The  truth  or  falsity  of 
certain  of  these  representations  it  is  within  their 
power  to  some  extent  to  test  by  evidence.  As  to 
the  residue  no  such  possibility  exists  ;  it  must  be 
left  to  stand  on  the  bare  word  of  the  promoter  of 
the  undertaking.  On  examination,  they  discover 
that  as  to  the  matters  within  their  cognizance  he 
is  not  to  be  trusted.  Either  he  is  wholly  mistaken 
himself  or  he  has  knowingly  misled  them.  But 
notwithstanding  this  impeachment  of  his  credi- 
bility, he  still  claims  their  confidence  as  to  the 
matters  which  are  concededly  beyond  the  range  of 
their  knowledge.  On  such  a  showing,  how  many 
followers  would  he  enlist  among  prudent  men, 
particularly  if  any  important  personal  interests, 
financial  or  otherwise,  were  involved  ?  And  yet 
this  is  the  position  to  which  the  critical  theories 
reduce  the  several  aspects  of  our  Saviour's 
teachings. 

Two  pleas  in  avoidance  are  advanced  :  One  is 
the  theory  of  accommodation  ;  the  other  that  of 
the  kenosis.  But  the  attempts  thereby  made  to 
hide  the  sinister  significance  of  the  "  assured 
results  of  criticism  "  are  evidently  mere  counsels 
of  desperation.  They  impale  the  Christian  upon 
249 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

the  horns  of  an  unthinkable  dilemma ;  the  one 
impugns  our  Lord's  sincerity,  the  other  his  infalli- 
bility. As  to  the  first,  its  bare  statement  ought 
to  condemn  it.  It  is  that  he  merely  conformed 
to  the  common  usage  of  the  Jews  without  in- 
tending thereby  to  indorse  their  opinions,  accom- 
modating himself  to  the  ignorance  of  his  hearers 
and  accepting  current  Jewish  notions  as  to  the 
Old  Testament  out  of  deference  to  prejudices 
which  might  otherwise  be  a  bar  to  their  accept- 
ance of  his  message.  Our  Lord  a  trimmer  ?  Set- 
ting his  sails  to  the  favoring  breezes  of  popular 
favor  ?  How  exceedingly  false  and  calumnious. 
Right  in  the  teeth  of  the  wind  of  their  doctrines 
he  held  his  course.  Most  emphatically  it  is  not 
true  that  he  accepted  Jewish  notions  regarding 
the  Scriptures.  The  Jews  of  his  time  held  them, 
as  overlaid,  controlled,  and  even  reversed  by  the 
traditions  of  the  fathers — traditions  which,  then 
and  thereafter,  were  reverenced  by  the  Jews  as 
possessing  an  authority  equal,  and  in  some  cases 
superior,  to  that  of  the  Old  Testament  writings 
themselves. 

Not  in  one  recorded  instance  did  he  fail  to  run 
counter  to  their  prejudices  on  this  subject.  On 
the  contrary,  he  sternly  exposed  and  as  sternly 
rebuked  them,  saying  on  one  occasion,  "Thus  have 
ye  made  the  commandment  of  God  of  none  effect 
by  your  tradition."  Indeed,  his  ministry  was  one 
250 


CHRIST    VERSUS    CRITICISM 


long  protest  against  "current  Jewish  notions,"  and 
his  consistent  opposition  thereto  was  one  of  the 
moving  causes  which,  humanly  speaking,  brought 
him  to  his  death.  With  respect,  moreover,  to 
their  true  significance,  the  attitude  of  our  Lord 
and  that  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  toward  these 
Scriptures  were  antipodal — in  harmony  at  no 
one  point,  as  his  repeated  denunciations  of  their 
perversions  thereof  abundantly  illustrate. 

But  the  excuse  is  an  impossible  one  in  any  view. 
The  idea  that  He  who  was  "the  Truth"  could 
knowingly  build  upon  a  false  foundation  is  one 
which  no  Christian  ought  for  a  moment  to  be  able 
even  to  contemplate  without  abhorrence. 

Nor  is  the  theory  of  the  kenosis  any  more  satis- 
factory. On  that  head  the  claim  is  made  that  our 
Lord  himself  did  not  know  by  whom  the  Penta- 
teuch was  written,  since  he  "habitually  spoke  in 
his  incarnate  life  on  earth  under  the  limitations  of 
a  properly  human  consciousness." l  The  one  direct 
affirmation  upon  which  this  claim  rests  is,  of 
course,  the  oft-quoted  phrase  in  Paul's  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians  in  which  our  Lord  is  described  as 
"emptying  himself"  (Phil.  2  :  7),  although  support 
is  sought  in  other  scripture  to  which  reference 
will  be  made. 

It   is  a  frequent  taunt  of  the  new  theologians 

1  Gore,  "  Bampton  Lectures"  for  1891,  p.  199,  quoted  by 
Canon  Rawlinson  in  "  Lex  Mosaica"  p.  46. 


251 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

of  the  critical  wing,  that  "  traditionalists,"  in  viola- 
tion of  the  principles  of  true  perspective  in  the- 
ology, are  given  to  the  founding  of  important  doc- 
trines on  isolated  passages,  as  e.  g.y  the  doctrine  of 
chiliasm  upon  the  twentieth  chapter  of  the  book 
of  Revelation.  But  here  the  critics  presume  to 
dogmatize  upon  the  profoundest  mystery  of  the 
Christian  faith — the  union  of  the  divine  and  human 
natures  in  the  Lord  Jesus — on  the  authority,  not 
of  an  isolated  passage,  but  of  an  isolated  word  in  a 
single  member  of  a  passage,  the  preceding  and  fol- 
lowing members  of  which  passage  characterize,  ex- 
plain, and  limit  the  phrase  in  question,  not  only 
specifying  the  particulars  in  which  this  "  self -empty- 
ing" was  manifested,  but  also  indicating  the  ethical 
lessons  to  enforce  which  was  the  apparent  inten- 
tion of  the  apostle's  words.  And  full  effect  may 
be  given  to  them  all  without  resort  to  the  gratu- 
itous injection  of  an  alien  element  which  is  in 
direct  conflict  with  the  plain  showing  of  the  gospel 
narrative  on  this  very  point. 

If  the  violent  divorcing  of  this  one  word  from 
its  explanatory  context,  and  the  baseless  expan- 
sion of  its  meaning  so  as  to  cover  a  far  wider  area, 
do  not  constitute  a  flagrant  infraction  of  the  true 
rule  of  interpretation,  which  demands  that  all  the 
clauses  of  a  complex  statement  shall  be  read  to- 
gether and  each  part  be  construed  as  restricted  and 
governed  by  the  general  tenor  of  the  whole,  then 
252 


CHRIST   VERSUS    CRITICISM 


it  is  difficult  to  see  how  such  an  offense  could  be 
committed. 

In  the  face,  however,  of  the  many  recorded  in- 
stances directly  and  by  implication  attributing  to 
our  Lord  supernatural  knowledge,  the  meaning 
and  scope  of  this  one  word  is  so  magnified  as  to 
deny  to  him  any  knowledge,  or  any  source  of 
knowledge,  save  that  which  he  possessed  in  com- 
mon with  other  good  men.  And  all  this  in  the 
name  of  scientific  exegesis.  It  is  the  abnegation 
of  common  sense  and  reduces  interpretation  to  an 
absurdity.  So  far  as  its  destructive  effect  on  any 
real  belief  in  the  proper  divinity  of  Christ  is  con- 
cerned, the  most  radical  Unitarian  could  ask  for 
no  stancher  advocacy  of  his  position. 

To  go  no  further,  the  eschatology  of  the  twenty- 
fourth  and  twenty-fifth  chapters  of  Matthew,  with 
its  categorical  statements  as  to  the  second  coming 
and  the  last  judgment,  and  its  definite  assignment 
of  precise  circumstance  and  order  of  event,  is  a 
complete  refutation  of  the  kenotic  theory.  The  very 
passage  in  that  discourse,  on  which  the  critics  rely 
as  distinctly  and  unmistakably  indicating  the  human 
limits  of  our  Lord's  knowledge,  points  decisively 
in  an  opposite  direction.  The  passage  is  :  "  Of  that 
day  and  hour  knoweth  no  man,  no  not  the  angels 
which  are  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the 
Father."  What  man,  "  speaking  under  the  limita- 
tions of  a  properly  human  consciousness,"  would 

253 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    CROSS-EXAMINED 

dare  presume  to  say  what  knowledge  was  or  was 
not  possessed  by  the  angels  which  are  in  heaven, 
standing  in  the  immediate  presence  of  God  himself  ? 
The  only  way  whereby  this  dishonoring  theory 
can  be  maintained  is  to  subject  the  Gospels  to  the 
treatment  accorded  to  the  Law  and  the  Prophets. 
There  are  indications  not  a  few  that  the  critics  are 
prepared  to  do  even  this,  the  result  being,  as  well 
stated  by  Dr.  John  Smith,  of  Edinburgh,  that  "we 
have  no  longer  an  authoritative  revelation,  and  our 
warrant  for  going  to  the  world  and  offering  pardon 
and  renewal  and  eternal  life  on  the  ground  of  a  divine 
covenant  promise,  foreshadowed  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  revealed  in  the  New,  is  taken  away."  1 

It  is  for  the  Christian  (and  it  is  to  him,  simply 
as  such,  that  this  appeal  is  addressed,  and  to  none 
other)  to  say  whether  upon  the  whole  case  the 
force  of  the  evidence  adduced  in  support  of  the 
critical  position  is  so  overwhelming  as  to  compel 
him  to  accept  its  conclusions.  This  will  in  some 
measure  depend  upon  the  value  at  which  he  ap- 
praises the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus, 
whereof  the  Hebrew  and  Christian  Scriptures 
afford  the  only  authentic  record.  If  it  is  to  him 
the  pearl  of  great  price  much  more  will  be  needed 
to  induce  its  surrender  than  the  mass  of  assump- 
tions and  conjectures  on  which  the  critical  edifice 

1  John  Smith,  "  Integrity  of  Scripture,"  p.  30. 
254 


CHRIST    VERSUS    CRITICISM 


is  builded.  If  he  holds  it  lightly,  as  a  thing  of  little 
worth,  but  slight  considerations  will  avail  to  form 
his  excuse  for  an  indifference  which  is  in  itself  a 
negation.  In  the  latter  case  the  end  of  the  pro- 
cess is  not  uncertain.  There  are  half-way  houses, 
but  he  cannot  abide  in  them.  By  sheer  momen- 
tum he  will  be  borne  inexorably  onward  and  down- 
ward until  he  is  brought  to  a  standstill  by  the  dead 
wall  of  naturalism,  compelling  him  to  relegate  the 
Scriptures  to  their  place  among  the  literatures  of 
the  earth  and  to  rank  his  Redeemer  with  the  great 
teachers  of  antiquity,  if,  indeed,  he  is  not  banished 
from  the  realm  of  actuality  altogether,  as  a  mere 
culture  hero. 

If  he  must  indeed  travel  this  path  the  brave 
part  would  be  for  him  to  face  the  inevitable  boldly 
and  without  delay,  and  with  a  sad  farewell  to  a 
lost  gospel,  a  buried  Christ,  an  unknowable  God, 
and  a  vanished  hope,  to  embrace  unaffectedly 
what  Thomas  Carlyle  called  "the  gospel  of  dirt 
and  everything  from  frogspawn,"  recognizing  in 
the  postulated  lumps  of  protoplasm  his  ultimate 
ancestors,  and  bowing  down  to  and  worshiping  the 
primeval  fire-mist,  the  fount  and  origin  of  things, 
the  creator  and  maker  of  us  all,  behind  which 
there  is — nothing. 


255 


GENERAL  INDEX 


Aaron,  a  fictitious  person,  127. 

Abraham:  Wellhausen's  opinion 
regarding,  67 ;  a  Scotch  critic's 
view  of,  68;  his  rescue  of  Lot, 
185,  186 ;  Christ  versus  critics  on 
disposal  of,  244,  245. 

Alford,  Dean,  on  Christ's  place  in 
the  Scriptures,  53. 

Amos:  developed  higher  concep- 
tions of  God,  73  ;  gives  prophet- 
ical evidence  of  Mosaic  law,  147. 

Anderson,  Sir  Robert:  on  Bible 
criticism,  27  ;  quoted,  92. 

Archaeologists,  authorship  of  Pen- 
tateuch and,  180. 

Archaeology :  some  demonstrations 
of,  180;  genuineness  of  Genesis 
fourteen  and,  187, 188. 

Argument  from  non-observance 
a  pillar   foundation  of   higher 
criticism,  167;  a  poor  foundation, 
170-175. 

Argument  from  silence :  worthless- 
ness  of,  155, 156 ;  Professor  Briggs 
on,  157;  Prof.  Robertson  Smith 
attaches  importance  to,  157 ;  Pro- 
fessor Kueuen's  novel  use  of,  157, 
158 ;  indispensable  to  critics,  159, 
160 ;  opportunities  for,  suggested 
by  Professor  Margoliouth,  161. 

Arguments,  pro  and  con,  137. 

Babylonian  inscriptions  :  their  tes- 
timony to  the  flood,  196 ;  discredit 
critics'  scheme  regarding  Penta- 
teuch, 196 ;  compared  with  Egyp- 
tian, 197. 

Bible :  its  authority  attacked,  13 ; 
assaulted  by  skeptics  and  Chris- 


tian critics,  14,  19;  position  of 
pundits  on,  25;  Eichhorn's  ef- 
forts to  eliminate  supernatural 
from,  31;  study  of,  as  literature, 
33-35  ;  attitude  of  Christian  of 
old-fashioned  type  toward  the, 
49-51 ;  inspiration  of,  49,  50 ;  mu- 
tilated by  critics,  86 ;  critics 
should  compile  a  new,  89 ;  neg- 
lect of,  236 ;  disregard  of  teach- 
ings of,  237. 

Briggs,  Professor,  on  argument 
from  silence,  157. 

Brugsch,  Doctor,  on  Egyptian  in- 
scriptions relating  to  life  of 
Joseph,  199,  200. 

Cairene  Ecclesiasticus,  Professor 
Margoliouth  on,  108. 

Campbell,  Lord  Chancellor,  on  sci- 
entific witnesses,  95,  96. 

Cheyne,  Professor,  on  date  of 
Psalter,  161,  162. 

Christ :  at  variance  with  critics, 
243-247 ;  and  historical  facts,  245, 
246 :  his  attitude  toward  Old  Tes- 
tament Scriptures  generally,  246, 
247 ;  aud  Jewish  notions  regard- 
ing Scriptures,  250. 

Christian  of  the  old-fashioned 
type :  attitude  of,  toward  the 
Book,  49 :  inspiration  of  Scrip- 
tures sufficient  for,  49,  50;  and 
study  of  Bible,  50;  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  Bible,  51 ;  the  Scrip- 
tures are  a  testimony  to,  53,  54  ; 
critical  methods  of  to-day  and, 
55  ;  his  reverential  habit,  55,  56; 
an  eager  student  of  prophetic 


257 


GENERAL    INDEX 


word,  56,  57;  would  be  chided 
by  "  Cbristian  critic  "  of  to-day, 
57,  58 ;  his  conception  of  preach- 
ing, 59 ;  welcomed  learning  and 
genius,  60 ;  his  regimen,  60,  61 ; 
his  sole  weapon  in  Christian 
warfare,  61,  230,  231 ;  his  doubts 
and  opinions  regarding  higher 
criticism,  227,  228;  his  concep- 
tions of  Holy  Spirit's  office,  231, 
232  ;  and  church  to-day,  232,  233. 

Christianity  :  present  type  of,  and 
past  contrasted,  45,  46;  in  the 
critical  concept,  210,  211. 

Christian  revelation  :  attacked  by 
higher  criticism,  13 ;  as  held  by 
old-fashioned  type  of  Christian, 
44 ;  Bible  inspired  and  infallible 
record  of,  59 ;  result  of  critical 
estimate  of  Old  Testament  on, 
210;  scholastic  spectacles  not 
needed  to  discern,  228. 

Christians :  higher  criticism  and, 
13;  thinking  on  higher  criti- 
cism, 20;  a  settled  conviction 
and  query  of  many,  20,  21 ;  rights 
and  interests  of,  in  the  contro- 
versy on  higher  criticism,  26; 
their  heritage,  26 ;  firm  beliefs  in 
the  earlier  days  of  devout,  39-45 ; 
should  admit  nothing  but  actual 
proof,  94  ;  higher  criticism  a  sub- 
ject of  momentous  import  to,  94  ; 
their  startling  situation,  247. 

Chronicles,  "a  tainted  whole,"  214. 

Church  :  and  higher  criticism,  13  ; 
possesses  an  antiseptic,  15,  16; 
an  easy  prey  if  spiritually  de- 
cadent, 15,  16 ;  influenced  by 
higher  criticism,  225,  226;  exist- 
ing conditions  in,  of  to-day,  232 ; 
spiritual  declension  in,  233 ;  its 
condition  of  impotence  due  to 
higher  criticism,  236. 

Colenso,  on  priestly  code,  130. 

Critic:  unfortunate  selection  of 
word,  28,  29;  its  primary  and 
secondary  meanings,  29,  30;  as 


faultfinder,  30;  the  assumption 
of  the,  32;  as  witness,  judge, 
jury,  sheriff,  32,  33. 

Critics:  their  possible  claim,  14, 
15 ;  would  chide  Christian  of  old- 
fashioned  type,  57;  their  opin- 
ions on  origins,  66,  67;  their 
history  of  the  patriarchs,  67-69 ; 
their  obliteration  of  Bible,  79; 
their  boast  of  success,  89 ;  condi- 
tions confronting,  in  contrast, 
98 ;  undismayed,  100 ;  on  priestly 
code,  100, 101 ;  on  sources  in  Pen- 
tateuch, 102 ;  adepts  at  game  of 
"follow  my  leader,"  103;  deter- 
mining authorship,  133 ;  histor- 
ical evidence  and,  121 ;  their  il- 
logical attitude,  130;  minimize 
effect  of  adverse  texts,  150 ;  and 
passage  in  Hosea,  150, 151 ;  argu- 
ment from  silence  and,  159;  au- 
thorship of  Pentateuch  and  their 
opinion  of,  180;  and  literary 
character  of  Mosaic  age,  182, 183 ; 
their  case  for  mode  of  produc- 
tion, etc.,  of  biblical  records, 
220 ;  their  law  of  evolution,  235 ; 
at  variance  with  Christ's  teach- 
ing, 244-246. 

Critics,  English,  contrasted  with 
German,  87,  88. 

Critics,  German,  contrasted  with 
English,  87,  88 ;  no  embarrassing 
features  presented  to,  213. 

Critical  methods:  and  Christian 
of  old-fashioned  type,  55 ;  illus- 
tration of  internal  evidence  ac- 
cording to.  110;  illustration  of 
historical  evidence  according  to, 
131-133 ;  inherent  vice  of,  155 ; 
inevitable  outcome  of,  212. 

Daniel,  book  of,  a  religious  novel, 

86. 
Denny,   Professor,   on  origin   of 

human  race,  66. 
Deuteronomy:    fashioned   out  of 

whole  cloth,  82,  83;  forged  in 


>58 


GENERAL    INDEX 


reign  of  Josiah,  160 ;  its  silence 
on  important  points,  160;  Kue- 
nen  on  laws  of,  216. 

Dillmann :  a  renowned  critic,  131 ; 
quoted,  194. 

Doublets :  basis  of  modern  criti- 
cism in  Old  Testament,  115; 
an  instance  of,  115,  116 ;  support 
historical  evidence,  124, 183, 184  ; 
Prof.  G.  A.  Smith  on  presence  of, 
183,  184  ;  noted  in  Deuteronomy 
and  Leviticus  by  Canon  Driver, 
148 ;  names  of  authors  of,  184  ; 
Prof.  Robertson  Smith  on,  184. 

Driver,  Canon  :  his  minute  literary 
analysis  of  Old  Testament,  112; 
his  "  Introduction  to  the  Litera- 
ture of  the  Old  Testament,"  121, 
122;  disagrees  with  Professor 
Smith,  122 ;  his  references  to 
"  priestly  usage,"  146  ;  on  vow  of 
Nazarite,  146;  on  Genesis  four- 
teen, 189 ;  on  narratives  in  gen- 
eral, 201 ;  on  date  of  priestly 
code,  215 ;  on  freedom  of  biblical 
writers,  216-218. 

Ebers,  Dr.  Georg,  on  conditions 
of  ancient  Egypt,  197. 

Egypt :  policy  of,  204  ;  changes  in 
national  life  of,  204.  205. 

Egyptian  inscriptions:  compared 
with  Babylonian,  197  ;  their  tes- 
timony to  patriarchal  and  Mo- 
saic narratives,  197;  confirm 
scriptural  account  of  Egyptian 
life.  197. 

Eichhorn :  originator  of  phrase, 
"  higher  criticism,"  31. 

Elijah  :  wiped  out  by  M.  Vernes, 
88 ;  age  of,  not  literary,  182. 

Elisha :  wiped  out  by  M.  Vernes, 
88 ;  age  of,  non-literary,  182. 

Evidence  :  should  be  first-class,  93  ; 
precarious  character  of,  107 ;  of 
divine  origin  of  Christian  reve- 
lation, 210. 

Evidence,  external :  lack  of,  94, 


195;  a  result  of,  195,  1%;  in 
Egyptian  and  Babylonian  in- 
scriptions, contrasted,  197. 

Evidence,  historical :  main  con- 
clusions of  critics  based  upon, 
121 ;  versus  literary  analysis, 
121,  122 ;  supported  by  existence 
of  "doublets,"  124;  method  of 
handling,  126 ;  a  legal  illustra- 
tion of,  131-133  ;  of  Mosaic  legis- 
lation, 147. 

Evidence,  internal:  critical  theory 
depends  entirely  on,  95 ;  known 
as  expert  testimony,  95;  its 
sphere,  95,  96  ;  its  usefulness  con- 
ditioned, 96,  97;  a  notable  in- 
stance of,  97,  98;  drawn  from 
books  of  Moses,  100 ;  sponsor  for 
various  theories,  107,  108;  illus- 
trations of  the  futility  of,  109- 
111 ;  critics'  reliance  upon,  195. 

Exodus,  book  of,  mutilated  by 
critics,  81,  82 

Faith,  Christian:  wounded  in 
house  of  friends,  14,  15 ;  and  re- 
vival of  1857,  16;  in  spiritually 
healthy  church,  16 ;  result  of 
unsettling,  18. 

Flood,  The :  Prof.  Robertson  Smith 
on,  184  ;  Professor  Sayce  on  Bab- 
ylonian account  of,  184;  Prof. 
G.  A.  Smith  on  Babylonian  ac- 
count of,  185 ;  external  evidences 
regarding,  196. 

French,  Valpy,  in  " Lex  Mosaica"" 
on  historical  evidences,  126. 

Genesis,  book  of :  and  critics,  80 : 
"  doublets  "  in,  124;  critics  and 
fourteenth  chapter  of,  186,  1ST  : 
archaeology  and  fourteenth 
chapter  of,  187,188 ;  Canon  Dri  vcr 
on  fourteenth  chapter  of,  189; 
Prof.  G.  A.  Smith  on,  190;  ques- 
tion at  issue  in,  191 ;  Professor 
Smith  and  late  origin  of,  205, 
206. 


259 


GENERAL    INDEX 


Hebrew:  only  adepts  in,  should 
be  heard,  25;  lack  of  knowl- 
edge of,  99;  Doctor  French  on 
ancient,  113;  vast  impetus  im- 
parted to  study  of,  226. 

Higher  criticism:  attitude  of 
church  toward,  13  ;  astonishing 
vogue  of,  15;  exponents  and 
champions  of,  17;  cause  and 
effect  of  condition  resulting 
from,  17 ;  inalienable  rights  of 
Christians  to  participate  in  con- 
troversy on,  26 ;  now  in  the  open, 
27 ;  a  progressive  and  evolution- 
ary science,  87 ;  its  history  and 
evidence,  107;  various  theories 
of,  107;  argument  from  non- 
observance  and,  167 ;  a  late 
phase  of,  167 ;  inevitable  out- 
come of,  212,  213;  influence  of, 
225 ;  its  gravest  issue,  243. 

Historical  books  of  Bible,  are  not 
historical  but  devotional,  83,  84. 

Hommell,  Professor,  on  fourteenth 
chapter  of  Genesis,  187. 

Hosea :  developed  higher  concep- 
tions of  God,  73;  critics'  treat- 
ment of  passage  in,  150,  151. 

Human  race :  a  brand  new  his- 
tory of,  65;  the  Bible's  account 
of  origin  of,  65 ;  Professor  Denny 
on  origin  of,  66 ;  Christian  critics' 
opinion  of  origin  of,  66. 

Israel:  Professor  Robertson's  brief 
summary  of  history  of,  40,  41 ; 
critics'  view  of  religion  of,  70-72 ; 
a  nation  of  borrowers,  72 ;  de- 
velopment of  religion  of,  73-75 ; 
their  system  of  laws,  74  ;  Canon 
Driver's  supposition  regarding, 
141 ;  disregarded  Mosaic  institu- 
tions, 168;  inveterate  idolaters, 


Johnson,  Doctor,  on  importance 
of  average  man  in  Bible  criti- 
cism, 27. 


Joseph:  Dr.  Georg  Ebers  on  his- 
tory of,  197  ;  Mr.  John  Urquhart 
on  history  of,  198,  199 ;  Egyptian 
atmosphere  of  story  of,  198. 

Josiah,  Deuteronomy  forged  dur- 
ing reign  of,  160. 

Judah,  disregarded  Mosaic  insti- 
tutions, 168,  169. 

Judges,  book  of,  Wellhausen's 
opinion  on,  125. 

Kenosis,  Theory  of:  its  claim,  251, 
253;  a  complete  refutation  of 
the,  253. 

Kuenen,  Professor :  quoted,  24 ;  on 
polytheism  of  Israelites,  70 ;  his 
novel  use  of  argument  from 
silence,  158,  159. 

Kings,  Book  of,  Wellhausen's 
opinion  of,  125. 

Leathes,  Prof.  Stanley:    quoted, 

106;    and  "The   Law  and   the 

Prophets,"  139. 
Leviticus,  Book   of,   deliberately 

fabricated,  83. 
Lias,  Chancellor:  on  inaccuracy 

of  the  Scriptures,  36 ;  quoted,  38. 
Literary    analysis:    by  Canon 

Driver,    112 ;    versus    historical 

evidence,  121, 122. 

Margoliouth,  Professor:  on  Cairene 
Ecclesiasticus,  108 ;  on  argument 
from  silence,  155,  156 ;  suggests 
opportunities  for  use  of  argu- 
ment from  silence,  161. 

Mosaic  law :  prophets  and  pre- 
existence  of,  140;  prophet  and 
historian  wrote  in  view  of,  147 ; 
Amos  finds  evidence  of,  147; 
post-exilic,  168;  disregarded  by 
Israel  and  Judah,  168,  169. 

Moses :  existence  of,  conceded, 
69 ;  as  lawgiver,  a  myth,  70,  81 ; 
wiped  out  by  M.  Vernes,  69,  87, 
88;  internal  evidence  drawn 
from  books  of,  100;  history  of 


260 


GENERAL    INDEX 


Israel  and  law  of,  167 ;  Christ's 
words  on  law  of,  247. 
Mosaic  age :  germs  of  conscious- 
ness of  God  present  in,  69,  70; 
critics  and  literary  character  of, 
182,  183. 

Nazarite,  law  of  the,  146,  147. 

Observations,  preliminary,  28-36. 

Patriarchs  :  Christian  critics'  view 
of  the,  68 ;  their  religion,  68,  69. 

Pentateuch  :  priestly  code  latest 
portion  of,  100;  number  of 
sources  in,  102  ;  Professor  Smith 
on  agreement  of  critics  regard- 
ing sources  in,  102  ;  Prof.  Stanley 
Leathes  and  significant  and  dis- 
tinctive phrases  used  in,  139, 
145 ;  assumptions  regarding,  142, 
143  ;  legislation  of,  incorporated 
with  historical  narrative,  145; 
authorship  of,  not  confirmed  by 
archaeologists.  180;  Wellhausen 
on  date  of  priestly  code  of,  214  ; 
its  authorship  assigned  to  Moses 
by  Christ,  247. 

Priestly  code:  latest  portion  of 
Pentateuch,  100;  tabernacle  an 
invention  of  forgers  of,  126,  127 ; 
Shiloh  culminating  fraud  of, 
128 ;  Wellhausen's  disposal  of, 
]29:  prescriptions  of,  146,  147; 
Wellhausen  and  Driver  on  date 
of,  214,  215 ;  Babylonian  origin 
of.  215. 

Prophecy  :  Christ's  place  in,  42-44  ; 
Christ  the  fulfillment  of  nil.  58; 
old-fashioned  type  of  Christian 
an  eager  student  of,  56-59. 

Prophets,  Books  of  the:  collec- 
tions of  anonymous  oracles,  85 ; 
their  practical  use.  86  :  saturated 
in  language  of  law,  138;  repeti- 
tion of  pentateuchal  phrases  in, 
139,  145. 

Psalms,  Book  of:  hymnal  of  the 


second  temple,  84 ;  ancient  or 
modern  according  to  critics' 
needs,  85. 

Rawlinson,  Canon,  on  Egyptian 
life  in  eighteenth  and  nine- 
teenth dynasties,  204,  205. 

Religion,  Christian  critics'  view  of 
origin  of,  67. 

Revival  of  1857,  Christian  faith  at 
time  of,  16. 

Robertson,  Prof.  James:  and  his- 
tory of  Israel,  40,  41 ;  quoted,  120, 
136;  illogical  attitude  of  critics 
shown  by,  130,  131. 

Samson,  as  a  Nazarite,  147,  148. 

Samuel,  wiped  out  by  M.  Vernes, 
88. 

Samuel,  Book  of:  entrance  to 
"  real  and  indubitable  history," 
125;  Wellhausen's  opinion  on, 
125. 

Sayce,  Professor :  on  limited  field 
of  analysts,  112  ;  his  "  Monument 
Facts  and  Higher  Critical  Fan- 
cies" commended,  181;  age  of 
Moses  a  literary  age  shown  by, 
181, 182 ;  on  Babylonian  account 
of  flood,  185 ;  quoted,  178,  193. 

Scott,  Archibald,  quoted.  64. 

Sinai,  Mount,  an  Oriental  Olym- 
pus, 71. 

Sinker,  Robert,  quoted,  242. 

Smith,  Prof.  George  Adam:  on 
critics  and  the  Pentateuch.  102: 
on  historical  evidence,  121 :  dis- 
agrees with  Canon  Driver,  122 ; 
on  Babylonian  study  of  the 
flood,  185;  on  Genesis  fourteen, 
190;  on  history  of  Joseph  and 
Egyptian  life,  202 :  on  Egyptian 
names  in  Genesis,  205,  206; 
quoted,  242. 

Smith.  John,  quoted,  '224. 

Smith,  Robertson  :  quoted,  24  :  on 
two  passages  in  book  of  Psalms, 
84,85. 


261 


GENERAL    INDEX 


Suppositions,  regarding  Penta- 
teuch, 142,  143,  145. 

Tabernacle :  as  precursor  of  tem- 
ple, 126;  direct  evidence  of  es- 
tablishment of,  127;  critics  dis- 
pose of  evidence  of,  128-130. 

Testament,  New :  foundations  of, 
not  affected  by  discrediting  Old 
Testament,  18,  19 ;  its  indissolu- 
ble union  with  Old  Testament, 
209 ;  its  severance  from  Old  Tes- 
tament not  imminent,  210 ;  crit- 
ics obliterate  gospel  of,  239. 

Testament,  Old :  suggestion  of  a 
canon  of  Church  of  England  re- 
garding, 59 ;  inspiration  of,  "  pre- 
supposed," 35,  36 ;  M.Vernes'  sup- 
position of  date  of  writings,  law, 
etc.,  of,  88;  critics'  boast  of  suc- 
cessful assault  on,  89  ;  should  be 
withdrawn  from  circulation  by 
critics,  90;  Canon  Driver's  lit- 
erary analysis  of,  112;  "doub- 
lets "  basis  of  modern  criticism 
on,  115 ;  criticism  of,  mainly  his- 
torical, 121 ;  its  position  in  Chris- 
tian scheme,  209,  210 ;  Christian 
revelation  weakened  by  critical 
estimate  of.  210;  indissoluble 
union  of,  with  New  Testament, 
211 ;  critical  condemnation  of, 
at  variance  with  divine  authen- 
tication, 244  ;  Christ's  treatment 
of  historical  facts  of,  244. 

Theory  of  accommodation,  con- 
demned, 250. 

Theory,  Kenotic.    See  Kenosis. 

"Theory,  Traditional":  an  un- 
warranted phrase,  89;  gravamen 
of,  167. 


Thomas,  John,  quoted,  208. 

Tracy  Peerage  Case,  Lord  Chan- 
cellor Campbell  on  expert  wit- 
ness in,  95,  96. 

Urquhart,  John,  on  life  of  Joseph 
198,  199. 

Van  Dyke,  Henry,  quoted,  166. 

Van  Orelli,  Professor,  expresses 
astonishment  regarding  dom- 
inant theory,  103. 

Vernes,  M.  Maurice:  discredits 
Moses,  69,  88 ;  wipes  out  proph- 
ets, 88;  his  supposition  of  Old 
Testament  writings,  88. 

Wace,  Henry,  quoted,  208. 

Watson,  Doctor,  in  "Lex  Mosaica' 
on  phrase  "The  author  knows 
nothing,"  156,  157. 

Watts,  Robert,  quoted,  78. 

Wellhausen :  his  view  of  Abra- 
ham, 67 ;  on  Moses  and  Israel- 
ites' conception  of  God,  70 ;  on 
Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings,  125; 
quoted,  136;  on  testimonies  of 
prophets  to  pre-existence  of  the 
Mosaic  law,  140,  141 ;  on  useful- 
ness of  argument  from  silence, 
159;  on  giving  of  the  law  upon 
Sinai,  175;  on  date  of  priestly 
code,  214. 

Wesley,  Charles,  poems  by,  12,  38, 
48,  224. 

Wharton,  Doctor,  on  results  of 
"probable  proof,"  102. 

Witnesses,  Scientific,  Lord  Chan- 
cellor Campbell  on,  95,  96. 

Worship,  Public,  falling  away  in 
matter  of  observance  of,  234. 


262 


Date  Due 

AG 

1 

*i 

iiiiHiimfft 

<§> 

BS500 .S88 

The  higher  criticism  cross-examined;  an 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1   1012  00011   2633 


